Members: Surveillance

Bob Neill: To ask the Prime Minister with reference to the answer to the right hon. Member for Haltemprice and Howden of 21 July 2009,  Official Report, column 1166W, on Members: surveillance, whether the Wilson Doctrine applies to forms of surveillance and interception which are not subject to authorisation by the Secretary of State's warrant.

Gordon Brown: I have nothing further to add to the answer I gave on 21 July 2009,  Official Report, column 1166W.

Asylum: Housing

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers were supported in accommodation in each parliamentary constituency in  (a) England and  (b) Wales on the latest date for which figures are available.

Phil Woolas: A table showing asylum seekers supported in accommodation, by UK Government office region and parliamentary constituency, as at the end of September 2009' was made available in the Commons Library on 26 November 2009 as part of the quarterly publications.
	Information on immigration and asylum are published annually and quarterly. Annual statistics and the latest statistics for Q3 2009 are available from the Library of the House and from the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate web site at:
	http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration-asylum-stats.html.

Counter-terrorism

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the  (a) objectives and  (b) terms of reference are of the Association of Chief Police Officers' Prevent Channel project for which his Department has provided funding.

David Hanson: The Channel Project provides a mechanism for ensuring that individuals identified as vulnerable to violent extremism are referred to and assessed by a multi-agency panel. The panel decides on the most appropriate action or intervention required to reduce this vulnerability. It therefore has a key role to play in driving delivery of Objective three of the Prevent Strategy: "Supporting vulnerable individuals who are being targeted and recruited to the cause of violent extremism".
	The Association of Chief Police Officers are responsible for national delivery of Channel which is currently operating across 12 police forces.

Extradition: USA

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his duty to assess the appropriateness of extraditing persons to the US in relation to health grounds applies  (a) at the time of the receipt of the US application,  (b) at the time of proceedings in the UK and  (c) at the time immediately before the extradition takes place; and if he will make a statement.

Meg Hillier: holding answer 6 January 2010
	In the scheme of the Extradition Act 2003, it falls to the courts to determine whether health factors raise a barrier to a person's extradition. However, the Home Secretary has an implied power to withdraw an extradition order where, exceptionally, a new matter arises subsequent to the completion of all proceedings under the Act but before extradition takes place. The basis for this implied power is section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998, which renders it unlawful for the Home Secretary, as a public authority, to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.

Hotels

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many hotel room nights were booked by officials in  (a) his Department and  (b) its agencies in each year since 2007; and how much (i) his Department and (ii) its agencies spent on fees of third party agents in relation to booking hotel accommodation in each such year.

Phil Woolas: The current contract for booking hotel rooms for the Home Office Headquarters, Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) and UKBA commenced in December 2008. Available information from this contract and since 2007 from the contract with the Identity and Passport Service on the number of nights booked by officials is as follows:
	
		
			  Hotel room nights 
			   January 2007 to November 2008  December 2008 to November 2009 
			 (a) Home Office Headquarters (1)- 12,345 
			 (b) UKBA (1)- 16,356 
			 (b) CRB (1)- 5,977 
			 (1)Information unavailable. 
		
	
	
		
			  Hotel room nights 
			   2007  2008  2009( 1) 
			 (b) IPS 6,159 10,165 9,376 
			 (1)To 18 December 2009. 
		
	
	For the period from December 2008 to November 2009, the total fee of the third party agents relating to booking hotel accommodation for both the (i) Home Office Headquarters and (ii) CRB and UKBA equates to £144,469.
	Information on hotel room nights booked and the hotel booking fee of the third party agents relating to the previous contract for the Home Office Headquarters and the UKBA for the period January 2007 to December 2008 is unavailable and to obtain would incur disproportionate cost.
	For the Identity and Passport Service the third party agents booking fee is incorporated into the hotel room cost, and a separate figure is unavailable.
	Expenditure is incurred in accordance with the principles of Managing Public Money and the Treasury handbook on Regularity and Propriety.

Police: Complaints

Peter Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 3 December 2009,  Official Report, column 83W, on police, when the Independent Police Complaints Commission requested police forces to start providing information relating to complainant disability; and when the resultant data will be published.

David Hanson: holding answer 6 January 2010
	As stated previously, the IPCC is responsible for the collation and publication of complaint statistics for England and Wales and has done so since it was established in 2004.
	The IPCC first captured information relating to complainant disability in April 2009. However, the IPCC had concerns about the accuracy and quality of the data and did not include the data in its Complaints Statistics for 2008-09. The IPCC will not publish the data until it is confident of its quality and accuracy and is working with forces to ensure the quality and accuracy of the disability data on complaints statistics recorded by forces.

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department with reference to his Department's publication, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000: Consolidating Orders and Codes of Practice Summary of Responses, page 18, if he will place in the Library a copy of the response from  (a) the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health,  (b) the Chartered Institution of Waste Management,  (c) the British Broadcasting Corporation,  (d) the Department of Communities and Local Government/Fire Services in England,  (e) the National Undercover Working Group Legal Group,  (f) the Chief Surveillance Commissioner and  (g) Interception of Communications Commissioner.

David Hanson: The Home Office intends to publish all responses on its website and will do so shortly. Copies of the responses will also be placed in the Library.

Religious Buildings: Registration

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department with reference to the answer of 28 October 2009,  Official Report, column 474W, on non-domestic rates: religious buildings, which organisations have had applications to be certified under the Places of Worship Registration Act 1855 rejected by the Registrar General since 1979.

Meg Hillier: The Places of Worship Registration Act 1855 (the Act) provides for places of meeting for religious worship, excluding those belonging to the Established Church, to be certified to the Registrar General. A number of tests are applied by the Registrar General when a place of meeting for religious worship is certified to him. This includes the application of the judgment by the Court of Appeal in the Segerdal case in 1970. The main finding in the judgment is that the words 'place of meeting for religious worship' in the Act connote a place of which the principal use is for people to come together as a congregation to worship God or do reverence to a deity. A further test is whether the principal use of the building is for worship or for other matters, such as a private home or social club.
	Once the Registrar General is satisfied that the place of worship certified to him is capable of recognition, he adds it to the register of such places which, under the Act, he has a duty to maintain.
	The duty placed on the Registrar General does not extend to maintaining and retaining records of places or organisations that are not capable of recognition as places of worship under the Act, and the records held in this respect by the Registrar General are incomplete. However, the records that the Registrar General does hold confirm that since 1979, the following organisations have made unsuccessful applications for buildings certified as places of worship to be added to the register:
	Miracle Revival Assembly
	Calvary Full Gospel Church
	Christians not otherwise designated
	Roman Catholics
	The Methodist Church
	Who object to be designated by any distinctive Religious Appellation
	Order of Christ Spirit
	Christian Spiritualist
	Jehovah's Witnesses
	Centre for Christ
	Pentecostal Assemblies of God
	Baptists
	Mount Zion Holiness Assembly
	Church of Christ
	Christian Fellowship in Huddersfield
	Interdenomination
	Christians Nazarenes Methodist and Pentecostal
	First Church of Christ, Scientist
	Wentworth Road Christian Fellowship
	Assemblies of God
	Llanelli Baptist
	Great Conrad Free Church
	Calvary Church of God
	Church of God
	Good News Church Macclesfield
	The Spiritualist Sanctuary
	German Speaking Evangelical Lutheran Congregation
	The Order of Women Freemasons
	Muslims
	Gur Sangat
	Orthodox Christians
	Cramlington Spiritualist Church
	Frankley Methodist /Anglican Church
	Fellowship of Churches of Christ
	God's Church of Peace
	Penzance Christian Fellowship
	Nailsea Christian Fellowship
	Pentwyn Christian Fellowship
	Officers and Members of Emmanuel Pentecostal Faith Church of God
	Church of Christ of Bethlehem
	Weybridge United Reformed Church
	Horringer Court Christian Fellowship
	Christchurch Abbeydale
	Brotherhood Movement
	Caribbean House Chaplaincy
	Greater World Christian Spiritualist Association
	The Independent African Caribbean Church of Christ of Nazareth
	The Pentecostal Evangelistic Assembly
	Letchworth Lodge of the Theosophical Society in England
	The Holiness Church of God Inc.
	The Othona Community
	Trinity Church of Christ
	The New Benedictine Order
	The Spiritualists National Union Redwoods
	Redditch Christian Fellowship
	The British Sailor's Society
	Emmanuel Christian Fellowship
	Highfield Free Church
	Good News Church
	Hammarens Ordens Sallskap-The Order of the Hammer
	Apostolic Church of God Seventh Day
	Mechanics
	Korean Presbyterian Church
	Coptic Orthodox Church
	United Reformed Church
	The Ashford Christian Spiritualist Church
	Universal Life Church
	Amazing Grace and Friends
	Tavistock Community Church
	Apostolics
	Trinity Church of Christ
	Church of England and United Reformed Church
	Confucians (Buddhists, Goddess of Mercy)
	Apostolic Church International (in UK)
	Members of the Correllian Nativist Church International
	Buddhists (New Kadampa Tradition)
	Cantheist
	Freedom Family Church
	Redeemed Christian Church of God
	C.J's City
	St. Andrews Church of God
	Wiccan
	Life Sanctuary Church
	Kriya Yoga Ashram
	Jesus Christ The Great Salvation Fellowship
	Mount Sion Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ

New Deal Schemes

John Pugh: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the cost to the public purse of the New Deal Gateway to Work programme was in the last 12 months; and how many participants the programme has had in each year since its inception.

Jim Knight: The New Deal Gateway to Work programme is a component of both the New Deal for Young People and the New Deal 25 Plus.
	The cost of the New Deal Gateway to Work programme in the 12 months to March 2009 for the 18 to 24-year-old client group was £41.4 million.
	For the age 25 plus client group, it is not possible to identify the costs of the New Deal Gateway to Work programme separately from other types of provision undertaken during the gateway period. This is because expenditure on this provision is not recorded separately from other provisions. The total cost of all gateway provision for the 25 plus year old client group was £15.8 million in the 12 months to March 2009.
	The following table sets out the number of participants who have started on the Gateway to Work provision for each year since inception.
	
		
			  Starters on the Gateway to Work course-a component of New Deal 
			  Financial year  New Deal for Young People  New Deal 25 Plus  Combined New Deal for Young People and New Deal 25 Plus 
			 2001-02 44,990 3,480 48,470 
			 2002-03 51,730 7,430 59,160 
			 2003-04 50,410 11,730 62,140 
			 2004-05 43,470 12,470 55,940 
			 2005-06 49,710 8,190 57,900 
			 2006-07 60,310 6,900 67,210 
			 2007-08 58,140 13,910 72,050 
			 2008-09 67,800 13,860 81,660 
			  Notes: 1. Figures rounded to the nearest 10. 2. The Gateway to Work course was introduced to New Deal for Young People in July 2000, so the first full year data is for 2001-02. 3. A pilot in a number of Districts for New Deal 25 Plus ended in March 2006, followed by optional use nationally.  Source: Department for Work and Pensions, Information Directorate

Social Security Benefits

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what guidance her Department gives people whose benefit claims are rejected or withdrawn on grounds of excess capital on what future rundown of capital will be regarded as reasonable.

Jim Knight: If a customer is not entitled to an income-related benefit due to excess capital a decision notice will be issued to the customer that includes reasons for the disallowance and details of their right to a reconsideration of the decision and, where appropriate, to an appeal. Customers are also informed that they will need to reapply if their circumstances change, in order for eligibility to be reassessed. No specific advice is given as to the future rundown of capital in these cases. This is because subsequent decisions on whether deprivations have occurred are a matter of judgement by independent decision makers.
	If it is established that the customer has deliberately deprived themselves of capital in order to obtain income related benefits, the customer will be treated as still possessing that capital when assessing entitlement to benefit. Their claim will be subject to a calculation to determine at what point this notional capital would have been expected to reduce below the capital limit and so enable the customer to make a new claim. The calculation is based on the prevailing benefit rates. The customer will be given details of the calculation in their case, together with the rights of review and, where appropriate, appeal.

Council Tax: Non-payment

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  with reference to the answer to the hon. Member for North West Norfolk of 18 May 2009,  Official Report, column 1214W, on council tax: non-payment, how many applications for liability orders were made to each magistrates' court in 2008-09;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the reason for the increase in applications for liability orders.

Bridget Prentice: The table shows the number of applications for council tax and business rate liability orders made within each accounting centre in 2008-09.
	The figures have been extracted from the intranet fees accounting system (IFAS). Fee income and volume are captured by accounting centres in IFAS. Some accounting centres comprise of more than one magistrates court. However, some of these accounting centres merge the management information which means it is not possible to supply data at individual court level.
	Applications for liability orders attract the same fee charge, and are therefore recorded on the IFAS in the same way. It is not therefore possible to distinguish between applications for liability orders made in relation to council tax and business rates.
	The overall number of applications made in 2008-09 as shown (3,121,089) is marginally different from my answer (3,124,406) to the hon. Member for North-West Norfolk (Mr. Bellingham) of 18 May 2009,  Official Report, columns 1214-1215W. The latter figure was extracted from the IFAS database at the time the hon. Member for North-West Norfolk's question was tabled, but in order to obtain a breakdown by accounting centre, data have been re-extracted from the IFAS. The IFAS is a "live" database, meaning that, inevitably, the normal course of regular system updating means that various additions, deletions, amendments and corrections will have been made to the data it contains relating to applications in 2008-09, giving rise to the marginal difference.
	Enforcement action in respect of non-payment of council tax is entirely a matter for local authorities. The Ministry of Justice has made no assessment of the reasons behind the increase in council tax liability orders.
	
		
			  Number of applications for council tax liability orders made by accounting centre in England and Wales, 2008-09 
			  Accounting centre  Number 
			 City of London Magistrates 1,525 
			 Horseferry Road Magistrates 26,826 
			 Bexley Magistrates 7,035 
			 Bromley Magistrates 8,957 
			 Camberwell Green Magistrates 81,412 
			 Croydon Magistrates 20,786 
			 Greenwich Magistrates 29,837 
			 Kingston-upon-Thames Magistrates 6,855 
			 Richmond-upon-Thames Magistrates 9,141 
			 London-West Group Magistrates 82,726 
			 Wimbledon Magistrates 21,182 
			 South Western Magistrates 15,935 
			 London North East Area Magistrates 133,815 
			 Barnet Magistrates 7,160 
			 Hendon Magistrates 16,333 
			 Brent Magistrates 29,010 
			 Enfield Magistrates 19,585 
			 Harrow Magistrates 5,854 
			 Highbury Corner Magistrates 48,092 
			 Haringey Magistrates 16,453 
			 Uxbridge Magistrates 13,569 
			 Bedfordshire Magistrates 47,465 
			 Cambridgeshire Magistrates 27,536 
			 Essex Magistrates-Civil 80,578 
			 Hertfordshire Central Accounting Unit 21,905 
			 Kent Central Finance Unit-East Kent Magistrates- Finance Centre 25,575 
			 Kent Central Finance Unit-North and Central Kent Magistrates 50,728 
			 Norfolk Magistrates 41,269 
			 Suffolk Magistrates Court 37,912 
			 Surrey Magistrates-Central Finance Unit 35,381 
			 Sussex Magistrates 80,870 
			 Central Buckinghamshire Magistrates-Aylesbury 34,828 
			 Oxfordshire Magistrates 27,277 
			 Berkshire Magistrates-Reading 42,763 
			 Bath Magistrates 3,452 
			 Bristol Magistrates 24,733 
			 Taunton Magistrates 7,442 
			 North Somerset Magistrates 12,840 
			 North Avon Magistrates-Yate 9,041 
			 South Somerset Magistrate 9,491 
			 Devon and Cornwall-North Devon Magistrates 3,583 
			 Devon and Cornwall-East Cornwall Magistrates 14,924 
			 Devon and Cornwall-West Cornwall Magistrates 9,428 
			 Devon and Cornwall-Central Devon Magistrates 9,413 
			 Devon and Cornwall-South Devon Magistrates 11,057 
			 Devon and Cornwall-Plymouth District Magistrates 18,183 
			 Dorset Magistrates-Central Finance Office 41,821 
			 Gloucestershire Magistrates-Central Finance Office 27,696 
			 Wiltshire-Swindon Magistrates 25,667 
			 Hampshire and Isle of Wight-North East and North West Hampshire Magistrates 17,059 
			 Hampshire and Isle of Wight-South West Hampshire Magistrates 33,025 
			 Hampshire and Isle of Wight-South and South East Hampshire Magistrates 35,065 
			 Hampshire and Isle of Wight-Isle of Wight (IOW) Magistrates 7,750 
			 Gwent Magistrates 33,176 
			 North Wales Magistrates-Central Finance Office, Denbigh 34,330 
			 South Wales Area 1-Central Finance Unit Unisys 65,349 
			 Dyfed Powys Magistrates 24,629 
			 High Peak 4,304 
			 North East Derbyshire and Dales Magistrates 15,812 
			 Southern Derbyshire Magistrates 33,969 
			 Leicester Magistrates 26,165 
			 Loughborough Magistrates 28,239 
			 Lincolnshire Magistrates 24,162 
			 Northamptonshire Magistrates 32,771 
			 Mansfield (Rosemary St.) Magistrates 9,110 
			 Newark Magistrates 4,431 
			 Nottingham Magistrates 44,782 
			 Worksop Magistrates 7,432 
			 Staffordshire Magistrates 67,958 
			 Walsall Magistrates 17,582 
			 Sandwell Magistrates 10,191 
			 Wolverhampton Magistrates Court 18,932 
			 Dudley and Halesowen Magistrates 17,329 
			 Warwickshire Magistrates 20,059 
			 West Mercia Magistrates 37,309 
			 Birmingham (VLC) Magistrates-(Corporation St.) 77,568 
			 Coventry Magistrates 18,697 
			 Solihull Magistrates 10,472 
			 Sutton Coldfield Magistrates 1,120 
			 Cumbria Magistrates-Central Payments Unit 24,066 
			 Bolton Magistrates 19,831 
			 Bury Magistrates 11,006 
			 Manchester Magistrates 66,085 
			 Oldham Magistrates 18,837 
			 Rochdale Magistrates 20,926 
			 Salford Magistrates 9,870 
			 Stockport Magistrates 22,185 
			 Tameside Magistrates 334 
			 Trafford Magistrates 17,966 
			 Wigan and Leigh Magistrates 20,180 
			 East Lancashire Magistrates-Blackburn 19,838 
			 Fylde Coast Magistrates-Blackpool 24,617 
			 Pennine Magistrates-Burnley 20,514 
			 South West Lancashire Magistrates-Chorley 8,847 
			 Preston and Lancaster Magistrates 16,978 
			 Knowsley Magistrates 11,472 
			 Liverpool Magistrates 62,608 
			 St. Helens Magistrates 9,786 
			 Cheshire Accounting Division(1) 34,811 
			 Cleveland Magistrates 44,277 
			 Durham Magistrates 41,219 
			 Humber-East Yorkshire Magistrates-Beverley 34,182 
			 Humber-North Lincolnshire Magistrates-Scunthorpe and Grimsby Central Finance Unit 12,564 
			 Humber-North Lincolnshire Magistrates-Scunthorpe and Grimsby Central Finance Unit 9,064 
			 North Yorkshire Magistrates 18,762 
			 Northumbria Magistrates 106,822 
			 South Yorkshire Magistrates 104,221 
			 West Yorkshire Magistrates 145,498 
			 Total England and Wales 3,121,089 
			 (1) Was North, South and West pre 1 July 2009  Source: Intranet Fees Accounting System

Iraq Committee of Inquiry

Jennifer Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many  (a) documents and  (b) other items of information held in electronic format by his Department of each security classification have been submitted to the Iraq Inquiry; and if he will make a statement.

Bridget Prentice: I refer to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Cabinet Office (Angela E. Smith) on 14 December 2009,  Official Report, columns 840-41W. The Ministry of Justice is in the process of providing the Iraq Inquiry with all the documents and electronic information it holds which has been requested to date. This information spans every level of Government security classification.

Prisoners Release

Greg Pope: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will assess the merits of increasing the period of time a person with a terminal illness can be released early from prison on compassionate grounds.

Claire Ward: Early release on compassionate grounds should only be permitted in the most exceptional circumstances and where the risk of re-offending is past. It is right, therefore, to apply stringent criteria. Prisoners with a terminal illness can receive the appropriate care and treatment while in custody and we believe that early release from their sentence should only be considered in the final stages or where they become too ill to remain in prison. The criteria applied in medical circumstances state:
	"the prisoner is suffering from a terminal illness and death is likely to occur soon; or the prisoner is bedridden or similarly incapacitated".
	The three month period is suggested as a guide for the sort of life expectancy that should be taken into consideration when applying the criteria but is just one of a number of factors that are taken into account.

Prisoners Release

Gordon Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many  (a) offenders and  (b) offenders on temporary licence were released from HM Prison Service into the Probation Service, in each year since 2004.

Maria Eagle: Adult offenders serving a sentence of 12 months or more and all young offenders under 22 years of age are, upon release, subject to supervision by the probation services.
	These figures are published annually in Offender Management Caseload Statistics (OMCS). Copies are in the House of Commons Libraries and on the MOJ website at:
	http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/prisonandprobation.htm
	The following table shows the number of discharges from determinate sentences from prisons in England and Wales. The figures are the sum of adult prisoners released from sentences of 12 months or more (including indeterminate sentences) and all young offender releases.
	
		
			   Prisoners released 
			 2004 42,000 
			 2005 42,000 
			 2006 40,400 
			 2007 42,700 
			 2008 45,600 
		
	
	Data for 2009 will be available in the OMCS 2009 which will be published in July 2010.
	Prisoners released on temporary licence remain the responsibility of the prison during the period of temporary release, however, where prisoners are liable to supervision on their normal release date but are released early under the End of Custody Licence scheme, they are required to meet their probation officer during the ECL licence period and to have regular contact after that in line with their supervision programme.
	The number of ECL releases for those prisoners serving sentences of 12 months or more and less than four years for the year 2007 and 2008 was 2,941 and 5,643. Data for 2007 is based on the period from 29 June, when the scheme started to 31 December.
	All figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

Prisoners: Location

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice at what average distance from home  (a) young adult prisoners,  (b) adult prisoners and  (c) children prisoners were held in each year since 1997, broken down by sex.

Maria Eagle: Table A shows the average travelling distance from home in miles of remand and sentenced prisoners held in HMPS accommodation by gender. Data prior to 2006 is not available in the format requested.
	All prisoners are asked for details of their home address on first reception to prison and on discharge from prison. Approximately 60 per cent. of prisoners (both male and female) are shown to have given a recognised address.
	If no address is given, various proxies are used to determine distance from home, including next-of-kin address and committal court address.
	
		
			  Table A 
			   Adult (21+)  Young offender (18 to 20)  Juvenile (15 to 17) 
			  Month  Male  Female  Male  Female  Male  Femal e 
			 September 2006 49 58 48 57 56 63 
			 September 2007 50 59 49 50 55 71 
			 September 08 50 57 50 53 52 55 
			 May 2009 50 55 49 51 51 55 
		
	
	Table B shows the average distance from home in miles for remand and sentenced young people in .secure children's homes and secure training centres from 2001 to 2009 by gender. Data prior to 2001 is not available in the format requested.
	Home area is taken as a young person's address at the time of sentence. If no address is recorded, the address of the Youth Offending Team that the young person is attached to is used as a proxy.
	
		
			  Table B 
			  Male Female 
			 2001 59 75 
			 2002 59 61 
			 2003 56 61 
			 2004 56 69 
			 2005 52 63 
			 2006 48 61 
			 2007 54 68 
			 2008 52 59 
			 2009 47 52

Reoffenders

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the most recent figures are for the re-offending rate of people aged  (a) under 18,  (b) between 18 and 21 and  (c) over 21 years old for people who have been released from prison.

Maria Eagle: Table 1 contains the one year reoffending rates for offenders aged under 18 who were discharged from custody in the first quarter of each year for which data are available.
	
		
			  Table 1: One year reoffending rates for offenders aged under 18 discharged from custody, 2000, 2002-07 
			  Cohort  Number of offenders  Rate of reoffending  Number of offences per 100 offenders 
			 2000 Q1 912 75.7 482.1 
			 2002 Q1 959 72.9 465.9 
			 2003 Q1 786 73.8 442.5 
			 2004 Q1 815 76.4 414.8 
			 2005 Q1 844 73.1 409.5 
			 2006 Q1 817 77.0 404.0 
			 2007 Q1 778 75.3 359.0 
		
	
	Table 2 contains the one year reoffending rates for adult offenders aged 18-21, and 22 and over, who were discharged from custody in the first quarter of each year for which data are available.
	
		
			  Table 2: One year reoffending rates for adults discharged from custody, 2000, 2002-07, by age of offender 
			  Age  Cohort  Number of offenders  Rate of reoffending  Number of offences per 100 offenders 
			 18-21 2000 Q1 3,653 63.9 333.0 
			  2002 Q1 3,369 63.7 349.5 
			  2003 Q1 2,985 61.9 334.9 
			  2004 Q1 2,980 58.8 301.8 
			  2005 Q1 2,682 56.5 266.8 
			  2006 Q1 2,500 53.8 243.0 
			  2007 Q1 2,285 56.2 267.7 
			  
			 22 and over 2000 Q1 12,064 47.6 219.1 
			  2002 Q1 12,196 52.6 271.2 
			  2003 Q1 11,361 51.8 264.4 
			  2004 Q1 12,769 50.3 241.7 
			  2005 Q1 11,897 47.4 219.9 
			  2006 Q1 11,864 44.9 201.1 
			  2007 Q1 10,525 45.3 213.5 
		
	
	 Note:
	Reoffending data are not available for 2001 due to a problem with archived data on court orders. Since it will not substantially increase the knowledge on the current progress on reoffending, no resources have been allocated to fix this problem.
	More information on the reoffending rates is available from the Ministry of Justice website.
	Adult reoffending:
	http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/reoffendingofadults.htm
	Juvenile reoffending:
	http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/reoffendingjuveniles.htm

Sentencing: Greater London

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  how many people received a  (a) simple caution,  (b) conditional caution,  (c) cannabis warning and  (d) penalty notice for disorder following a court appearance in each London local authority in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  how many young people received a  (a) reprimand,  (b) final warning and  (c) penalty notice for disorder following a court appearance in each London local authority in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

Claire Ward: Cautions, cannabis warnings, reprimands, warnings, and penalty notices for disorder are out of court disposals issued by the police, authorised persons and the Crown Prosecution Service to deal proportionately with less serious offences which do not merit prosecution at court. Data reported centrally on the number of cautions, cannabis warnings, reprimands, warnings or penalty notices for disorder issued do not identify if an offender has previously appeared in court.
	The number of persons receiving a caution, reprimand or warning, or given a penalty notice for disorder, in Greater London, by age group, from 2003 to 2007 (latest available) is given in table 1 as follows. Currently, data on simple or conditional cautions are not published separately although the Crown Prosecution Service is planning to publish conditional cautioning data on a monthly basis from February 2010.
	Cautions and court proceedings data are not available at local authority level therefore information is given in the table for Greater London (includes the Metropolitan and the City of London police force areas).
	Cautions, penalty notices for disorder, and court proceedings data for 2008 are planned for publication on 28 January 2010.
	Since 2004 the police may issue an adult offender with a cannabis warning for simple possession of cannabis (prior to 2006 referred to as a "street warning"), in accordance with guidance issued by the Association of Chief Police Officers for England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Home Office Statisticians advise that an offence can be shown as detected once the police have issued a cannabis warning. The data collected centrally relates to the number of offences of cannabis possession detected by means of a cannabis warning and may not be the same as the number of cannabis warnings issued to offenders. Information on the number of cannabis warnings recorded by the police as method of detection for possession of cannabis offences for the London region from 2004-05 to 2008-09 can be viewed in table 2 as follows.
	
		
			  Table 1: The number of offenders issued with a caution, reprimand, warning and penalty notice for disorder in London( 2) , by age group, 2003 to 2007( 3,4,5) 
			   Cautioned  Penalty notice for disorder (PNDs)( 6) 
			   Total cautioned( 7)  Aged 10 to 17 reprimand  Aged 10 to 17 warning  Aged 18 or over cautioned  Total PNDs  Aged 16 and 17  Aged 18 and over 
			 2003 32,297 6,248 3,313 22,736 (1)- (1)- (1)- 
			 2004 32,433 6,851 4,128 21,454 12,818 342 12,476 
			 2005 35,959 7,180 3,880 24,899 18,266 888 17,378 
			 2006 44,694 8,577 4,282 31,835 21,172 1,192 19,980 
			 2007 49,706 8,587 4,600 36,519 25,070 1,306 23,764 
			 (1) Not applicable. (2) Includes Metropolitan police force area and City of London police force area. (3) From 1 June 2000 the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 came into force nationally and removed the use of cautions for persons under 18 and replaced them with reprimands and warnings. (4) The cautions, reprimand and warning statistics relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When an offender has been cautioned, reprimanded or received a warning for two or more offences at the same time the principal offence is the more serious offence. (5) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. (6) The Penalty Notice for Disorder Scheme was implemented in all 43 police forces in England and Wales in 2004 under the provisions of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001. (7) Includes Reprimands and Warnings.  Source:  Justice Statistics Analytical Services. 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: The number of cannabis warnings recorded by the police as method of detection for possession of cannabis offences, for the London Region( 1) , 2004-05 to 2008-09 
			  Police force area  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07  2007-08  2008-09( 2) 
			 London region 13,665 21,722 30,927 47,415 47,710 
			 (1) Comprises City of London Police and Metropolitan Police. (2) Since 26 January 2009, Penalty Notices for Disorder (PNDs) can be given for cannabis possession. Up to the end of March 2009 such PNDs were counted together with cannabis warnings.  Source:  Home Office Statistics.

Child Benefit: EU Nationals

John Battle: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the  (a) average,  (b) upper quartile and  (c) lower quartile length of time was taken to obtain confirmation that family benefits were not in payment in another EEA member state for EEA national child benefit claimants in (i) 2005-06, (ii) 2006-07, (iii) 2007-08 and (iv) 2008-09.

Stephen Timms: The information requested is not available, as HM Revenue and Customs' systems do not capture the time taken to obtain confirmation from other EEA member states.

Departmental Pay

Vincent Cable: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many staff in his Department received bonus payments in each of the last five years for which information is available; what proportion of the total workforce they represented; what the total amount of bonuses paid was; what the largest single payment was; and if he will make a statement.

Grant Shapps: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  how many  (a) year end and  (b) in-year bonuses were paid to officials in his Department in each of the last three years; and how much was paid in each year;
	(2)  how much funding his Department has allocated for  (a) year-end and  (b) in-year bonuses in 2009-10.

Sarah McCarthy-Fry: The following table sets out the information requested on performance awards paid by HM Treasury in 2008-09. For information on prior years I refer the hon. Member to the answer my right hon. Friend the then Exchequer Secretary (Angela Eagle) gave him on 17 November 2008,  Official Report, column 164W.
	
		
			   HM Treasury performance awards 2008-09 
			  Expenditure incurred  
			 Performance award (£000) 1,177 
			 Special performance award (£000) 208 
			   
			  Number of staff receiving a bonus  
			 Performance award 482 
			 Special performance award (1)492 
			   
			  Percentage of staff receiving a bonus( 2)  
			 Performance award 39 
			 Special performance award 40 
			   
			 Largest single award (£000) 20 
			 (1) In addition, one award was made to a member of staff on secondment to a private sector organisation that subsequently reimbursed the Department. (2) Based on FTE headcount at 31 March 2009.

British Overseas Territories

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs with reference to the answer of 9 October 2009,  Official Report, column 1241W, on British Overseas Territories: prisoners, what plans there are to increase prison capacity in each of the UK Overseas Territories in the Caribbean in which prisoner population exceeds capacity.

Chris Bryant: The information is as follows.
	Anguilla: The prison service has submitted a bid to the Government of Anguilla for financial support to enable the prison to purchase modular "ready to use" prison cells. In addition, concurrent plans are in hand to assess the feasibility of converting the prison's administration block into cellular accommodation. It is also expected that the Parole and Probation Bills will be passed in 2010, thereby diverting from prison a number of offenders and reducing overall prisoner numbers.
	British Virgin Islands: A feasibility study is underway to assess the practicality of converting an existing prison workshop and storage area into cellular accommodation for lower risk prisoners. In addition, the establishment of the Parole Board in early 2010 will see a number of early releases on parole, thereby reducing prisoner numbers.
	Cayman Islands: There is a process of building work within the site of HMP Northward which will add capacity during 2010. In addition, the Cayman Islands Government are assessing the potential of an "early release" scheme for suitable offenders and have set up a working group to look at the feasibility of a National Strategic Rehabilitation Board.
	Turks and Caicos Islands: A new wing of the prison is now complete and the necessary security fencing is due to be finished by the end of January 2010. Although this wing is for the few female prisoners, the opening of this wing will free-up capacity elsewhere in the prison. In addition, the imminent completion of a new prison kitchen will enable the existing kitchen area to be converted into accommodation for low risk prisoners early in 2010.

Broadband

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs with reference to the answer of 14 October 2009, what proportion of households in  (a) the Falkland Islands,  (b) St. Helena and  (c) Tristan da Cunha have access to broadband internet.

Chris Bryant: Responsibility for telecommunications in the Falkland Islands, St. Helena and Tristan da Cunha rests with the Governments of the Falkland Islands, St. Helena and Tristan da Cunha who hold the required information.

Cayman Islands

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs with reference to the answer of 26 October 2009,  Official Report, columns 66-67W, on the British Overseas Territories: police, how many of the officers arrested for criminal activity in the Cayman Islands were convicted.

Chris Bryant: The Royal Cayman Islands Police Service has clarified that, of the 13 officers arrested in the last five years, six were arrested for criminal offences and the others were arrested for non-criminal offences. Of the six arrested for criminal offences, three have been convicted, two await trial and one has been acquitted.

Departmental Air Travel

Andrew Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what his Department's policy is on the accumulation and use of air miles by his Department's personnel flying at public expense.

Chris Bryant: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Member for Derby, South (Margaret Beckett) the then Secretary of State to the hon. Member for Upper Bann (David Simpson) on 17 May 2006,  Official Report, column 995W.

International Criminal Law

Michael Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made in securing an internationally-agreed definition of the crime of aggression; what the Government's proposed definition is; and if he will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: A Special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression concluded its work on 13 February 2009. The report is available at:
	http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ICC-ASP-7-20-Add.1-SWGCA%20English.pdf
	It includes proposals on the definition of the crime of aggression, with which the UK is generally content, as well as on the conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction over the crime. The proposals on the latter issue include a number of options. The proposals will now be considered at the Review Conference of the International Criminal Court to be held in Kampala in 2010. The Government continue to believe that any proposals must be consistent with the Charter of the UN and in particular with the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security.
	We have no plans at present to make a further statement.

Kenya: Foreign Relations

Nicholas Soames: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what aims and objectives he has set for UK foreign policy in respect of Kenya.

Ivan Lewis: UK foreign policy aims to encourage and support implementation of the National Accord agreed by the Kenyan Government following the 2007-08 post-election violence, to address issues that threaten the country's stability and prosperity. These include promoting a better constitution that reduces the "winner takes all" incentives for violence, making electoral cheating harder, and deterring political violence through reducing impunity. We will continue to support Kenyan leadership in tackling the root causes of violence, including economic inequality, tribal tension, lack of security sector reform and accountability. We will also work to combat corruption in Kenya, which is endemic with little political will to change. This is the same culture that embeds impunity, as seen in Kenya's failure to prosecute those who perpetrated the post-election violence.
	The Government work closely with the EU and other partners such as Kofi Annan to co-ordinate support and engagement against these objectives . My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary attended the EU General Affairs Council Meeting in Brussels last July where Council Conclusions on Kenya were agreed. The conclusions highlighted the need for faster implementation of key reforms vital to the interests of the Kenyan people. My noble Friend, Baroness Kinnock the Minister for Africa plans to visit Kenya next week, and will reinforce these messages.

Sudan

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the new agreement between the National Congress Party and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement on the rules for the forthcoming referendum in the south of Sudan; what reports he has received on the eligibility to register and vote of  (a) southerners living in the north of Sudan and  (b) northerners living in the south of Sudan; and if he will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: The Minister of State, Department for International Development, my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, West (Mr. Thomas) and my noble Friend Baroness Kinnock issued a statement on 15 December 2009 welcoming the progress made towards the forthcoming referendum in South Sudan following the agreement on 13 December 2009 at the level of the Presidency on the draft bill.
	The draft bill reflected agreement between the parties on the eligibility to register and vote of southerners living in the north of Sudan and northerners living in the south of Sudan. We welcome the news that, despite last minute difficulties, on 29 December 2009 this bill was agreed by consensus in the National Assembly in Sudan.
	We also welcome the news that the legislation regarding the referendum for Abyei and the popular consultations for Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile States was passed by the National Assembly on 30 December 2009.

Sudan: Human Rights

Keith Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent assessment has been made of the human rights situation in South Sudan; and if he will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: As a result of tribal fighting, more people have died this year in South Sudan than in Darfur. This, and attacks by the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) displaced more than 300,000 people-more than double the number from 2008. The Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS) face several challenges which include the worsening humanitarian situation as well as security issues, corruption and the mismanagement of food stocks.
	Our ambassador met with the Southern Sudan Human Rights Commission in June to assess human rights issues, including the death penalty, women's rights, access to justice and the standard of detention facilities. Our ambassador also meets regularly with the GoSS President and Ministers to discuss citizen insecurity and LRA issues. The UK also works with the UN Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) and other international partners to secure peace so that human rights can be protected in Southern Sudan.
	My noble Friend, Baroness Kinnock will give a further assessment of developments in Sudan during a debate in the Lords today, 7 January 2010.

Sudan: Politics and Government

Keith Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what initiatives on Sudan the Government has put forward under the recently re-established troika mechanism; and if he will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: We are in regular contact with key partners on all of the issues that face Sudan. This includes contact with both the US and Norway, who together with the UK constituted the Troika during the negotiations for the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). Our ongoing and close contact with the US and Norway forms a part of the UK's continued engagement with key partners on the situation in Sudan.
	The parties to the CPA will need to decide between themselves on the initiatives and mechanisms that will support their efforts to arrive at a peaceful conclusion to the Interim Period. International partners should be prepared to play a strongly supportive role.
	My noble Friend, Baroness Kinnock gave a further assessment of developments in Sudan during a debate in the Lords today, 7 January 2010.

Sudan: Politics and Government

Keith Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment has been made of the implementation of the border ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration for the area of Abyei in Sudan in July 2009; and if he will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: The implementation of the Abyei ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration made in July 2009 is a key part of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). We are concerned that, despite public commitment by both the National Congress Party and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement to implement the ruling, progress remains significantly behind schedule. We understand that only a small number of border markers along the 230 kilometre border have been placed. Continuing uncertainty over the border increases potential tensions and hinders implementation of other CPA milestones.
	We continue to press both parties to ensure that border demarcation, as well as other commitments on Abyei, are urgently completed. A representative of our embassy in Khartoum visited Abyei in early December 2009 as part of a joint delegation with US Embassy and the Assessment and Evaluation Commission. The delegation raised our concerns directly with government and other interlocutors.

Sudan: Politics and Government

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent assessment he has made of the political situation in Sudan consequent on the North-South agreement on progress towards the forthcoming referendum; and if he will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: The Secretary of State for the Department of International Development (Mr. Thomas) and my noble Friend Baroness Kinnock released a statement on 15 December 2009 welcoming the progress made towards the forthcoming referendum following the agreement on 13 December 2009 at the level of the presidency on the draft bill.
	We welcome the news that, despite last minute difficulties, on 29 December 2009 this bill was agreed by consensus in the National Assembly in Sudan.
	We also welcome the news that the legislation regarding the referendum for Abyei and the popular consultations for Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile States was passed by the National Assembly on 30 December 2009.
	We continue to urge the parties to work together at this critical point in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement to make progress on other outstanding areas and to help deliver a peaceful, equitable future for the whole of Sudan.

Tony Blair

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what checks are in place to ensure that monies made available to the United Nations Development Trust Fund to support the work of the Middle East Peace Envoy are not used for unauthorised or unconnected purposes.

Ivan Lewis: The work of the Office of the Quartet Representative is set within the context of a UN Development Programme (UNDP) programme and is managed by the UNDP office based in Jerusalem according to UN procedures.

Tony Blair

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of Tony Blair in his role as Middle East peace envoy.

Ivan Lewis: The UK supports the aims of the Quartet, which are aligned with UK interests. Mr. Blair has made a significant contribution to these aims through his work as Quartet Representative. I refer the hon. Member to my answer in parliamentary question 309256.

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

Tom Watson: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what his Department's policy is on the negotiation of the proposed international Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.

David Lammy: The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement is a draft multi-lateral agreement which aims to provide a high-level international framework that strengthens global enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPRs). To combat the counterfeiting and piracy that threatens IPR owners, lawful businesses and the development of the world economy, ACTA concentrates on three areas; (i) better co-ordinated international co-operation, (ii) establishing best practice in enforcement methods and (iii) providing a more coherent legal framework.
	The UK's policy on the negotiation of ACTA is to create an international standard to fight the growing problem of large-scale counterfeiting and piracy more efficiently, without introducing new UK Intellectual Property legislation.

Departmental Procurement

Philip Hammond: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills whether there has been any nugatory cost to  (a) his Department and its predecessors and  (b) its agencies arising from tendered procurement in circumstances where the tender process has been cancelled prior to the award of the contract in the last five years.

Patrick McFadden: The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills is unable to provide nugatory costs relating to cancelled tenders because such costs are not recorded centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost
	I have approached the chief executives of the Insolvency Service, Companies House, the National Measurement Office and the Intellectual Property Office and they will respond to hon. Member directly.
	 Letter from Stephen Speed:
	The Minister of State, for the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) has asked me to reply to you directly on behalf of the Insolvency Service in respect of your question (2009/289) whether there has been any nugatory cost to (a) his Department and its predecessors and (b) its agencies arising from tendered procurement in circumstances where the tender process has been cancelled prior to the award of the contract in the last five years.
	The Insolvency Service has not cancelled any tenders prior to award of contract in the last five years.
	 Letter from Peter Mason, dated 3 December 2009:
	I am responding in respect of the National Measurement Office to your Parliamentary Question tabled on 30 November 2009, to the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.
	There have been no nugatory costs to the Agency in the last five years relating to tendered procurement where the tender process has been cancelled prior to the award of the contract.
	 Letter from Sean Dennehey, dated 4 December 2009:
	I am responding in respect of the Intellectual Property Office to your Parliamentary Question tabled 30 November 2009, to the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.
	There has been no nugatory direct cost to the Intellectual Property Office arising from procurement where the tender process has been cancelled prior to the award of the contract in the last five years. However, there was in 2006/07 and 2007/08 nugatory staff effort estimated at approximately £100 each year.
	 Letter from Gareth Jones:
	I am replying on behalf of Companies House to your Parliamentary Question tabled 30 November 2009, UIN 303711, to the Minister of State for Business, Innovation and Skills.
	In the last five years Companies House has cancelled one procurement tender exercise prior to award of contract. There were no costs paid to the invited bidders as a result of the cancellation. Internal staff costs would have been incurred in the preparation of the tender process, but it is not possible to quantify them as they were not part of a formal project and therefore not recorded. However, we would not term these particular costs as being nugatory as a lot of the output generated has had continued value as reference material for future procurements.

Economic Situation

Theresa May: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills for which policies implemented as part of the Government's response to the recession his Department is responsible; when each such policy was determined; what timetable has been set for the implementation of each such policy; and what funding under each budget heading has been allocated to each such policy.

Patrick McFadden: The BIS policies that were designed specifically to respond to the economic downturn are those launched as "Real Help" schemes by the predecessor Departments (BERR and DIUS), as well as targeted support for graduates and key industrial sectors. The information you have requested is summarised in the following table.
	
		
			  Scheme  Date agreed  Timetable for implementation and key milestones  BIS funding 
			 Enterprise Finance Guarantee Announced in November 2008. 12-month continuation announced in December 2009. 14 January: Scheme launched to enable up to £1.3 billion of additional bank lending to SMEs by 31 March 2010. Up to £500 million of additional lending to be enabled between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2011. Scheme is subject to a 13 per cent. cap on net defaults-Government liability limited to £125 million for initial lending and £50 million for additional lending. 
			 Capital for Enterprise Fund Announced in January 2009. January 2009: Scheme announced. Fund registered interest while fund managers were being appointed. April 2009: Fund Managers appointed. End of March 2010: Fund will be closed to new investments. Fund is on course to invest its allocation in this period. Fund is £75 million, comprising £50 million of Government funds and £25 million committed from banks. £55 million is committed to be invested in period up to the end of March 2010, with £20 million reserved for follow on funding. 
			 Working Capital Scheme Announced in January 2009. January 2009: Scheme launched. March 2009: EU State Aids approval received. April 2009: First tranche of guarantees agreed with RBS and Lloyds Banking Group. July 2009: Second tranche signed with Lloyds Banking Group. Short-term existing bank lending is guaranteed up to the end of March 2011. The scheme is designed to be cost neutral. An appropriate provision has been made to cover the possibility of unexpected losses. 
			 Trade Credit Insurance Top-up Scheme Announced in April 2009. May 2009: Scheme launched to cover reductions in trade credit insurance cover from 1 October 2008. Two changes made to the scheme: (1) June 2009: Eligibility for the scheme was backdated from 1 April 2009 to 1 October 2008. (2) August 2009: The price was reduced and cover limits were increased. 31 December 2009: Scheme closed to new applicants and all policies will expire by 30 June 2010 at the latest. Demand-led scheme designed to be cost neutral. Contingent liabilities under the scheme capped at a maximum of £5 billion. 
			 Prompt Payment Ongoing interest. However, in response to evidence of extending payment times in autumn 2008, BERR announced a range of enhanced measures focused on government-to-business and business-to-business payment. October 2008: commitment for all central Departments to pay invoices within 10 days-19 out of every 20 invoices are now paid in 10 days. November 2008: BERR (with leading UK business organisations) launches a series of managing cash flow guides. December 2008: BERR supports launch of a new Prompt Payment Code by the Institute of Credit Management. There are now 740 signatories. Development of 10 managing cash flow guides-total cost in the region of £30,000. 
			 Automotive Assistance Programme The Automotive Assistance Programme (AAP) received European Commission State Aids approval on 27 February 2009 and was launched in March 2009. AAP operates under the European Commission Temporary Framework for State Aids, which ends on 31 December 2010. The final maturity dates of loan guarantees and loans can extend beyond 2010. Will support investment in automotive sector of up to £2.3 billion through loan guarantees and, exceptionally, loans. 
			 Vehicle Scrappage Scheme Announced in April 2009. May 2009: Scheme launched. September 2010: Additional funding to the scheme announced. Up to £400 million. 
			 Response to Redundancy Announced in November 2008. April 2009 to December 2010. £100 million. 
			 Six month offer Announced in January 2009. April 2009 to March 2011 £83 million. 
			 Young Person's Guarantee (Routes into work and work- focussed training strands) Announced in April 2009. November 2009 to March 2011. £122.4 million 
			 Train to Gain SME flexibilities Announced in October 2008. On offer from January 2009. Flexibilities for funding for repeats ongoing; funding for short units due to end July 2010. From Train to Gain budget, up to £350 million of growth over two years. 
			 Professional and Career Development Loans (PCDLs) Announced in the New Opportunities White Paper in January 2009. 1 July 2009: An enhanced version of the Career Development Loans programme went live. We remain committed to delivering 45,000 loans per year as soon as the capacity exists within banks to meet that target. £12 million additional money allocated for 2009-10, with £24 million for 2010-11. This is on top of the recurrent baselines in place (to support existing Career Development Loans) of £25 million per year. 
			 Apprenticeships (England). 35,000 additional places in 2009-10 Announced January 2009. 2009-10 financial year: 35,000 additional Apprenticeship starts in England funded by DCSF and BIS. £140 million (BIS and DCSF). 
			 Support for Graduates Office for Graduate Opportunities (OGO) established in April 2009 in response to downturn. OGO responsible for several initiatives, as summarised in next column. Internships: initial target of 5,000 internships now increased to 20,000. To be delivered by March 2010. Graduate Talent Pool website: went live in July 2009. Post-graduate study: ongoing policy to increase places-around 24,000 additional places expected-and support through PCDLs (see separate entry in table). Volunteering: 4,000 full-time and over 50,000 part-time or short-term. Help with business start-up or entrepreneurship training: including via HEFCE's Economic Challenges Investment Fund (ECIF) and Flying Start. Ongoing policy. Extra Mini-Knowledge Transfer Partnerships: 10-40 week placements in SMEs for graduates/postgraduates to work on specific projects vital to the business. Teach First: places for 2009/10 and 2010/11. BIS funds the Graduate Talent Pool website and provided funding of £1.184 million in 2009-10 to cover infrastructure and publicity costs. In addition, BIS is working with DWP and HEFCE to deliver 10,000 subsidised internships, at a cost of around £16 million.

Employment: Bullying

Don Touhig: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what steps his Department is taking to reduce levels of bullying in the workplace.

Patrick McFadden: Existing legislation protects workers from the most serious kinds of bullying, for instance in cases of discrimination or harassment. The Government publish information and guidance on how this legislation can be used, and ACAS provides a nationwide telephone advice line offering assistance to employers and employees on bullying and other employment issues. These measures support the Government's policy aim that workers should be able to work without fear of being bullied or harassed by employers, fellow employees or anyone else.
	Approximately £1 million was committed through DTIs Partnership at Work Fund to support a project on Dignity at Work/Bullying. The project, which completed in May 2008, was led by the Amicus section of UNITE and included BAE Systems, Legal and General and British Airways as partners. The project promoted best practice and workplace initiatives to tackle bullying.
	In November BIS was pleased to support the launch of new Guidance on Preventing Harassment and Violence in the Workplace prepared jointly by the CBI, (Confederation of British Industry), the PPE (Partnership of Public Employers) and TUC (Trades Union Congress in association with HSE (Health and Safety Executive), and ACAS (Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service).
	The joint guidance, issued following a Europe-wide agreement between employers' organisations and unions, aims to give practical help and support to firms and their employees.
	This is available at:
	http://www.workplaceharassment.org.uk/

European Investments Bank's 2020 Fund

Dai Davies: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills which companies and organisations will be eligible to apply for support for green infrastructure projects from the European Investments Bank's 2020 Fund; and over what period this Fund is intended to remain open to applications.

Sarah McCarthy-Fry: I have been asked to reply.
	The 2020 European Fund for Energy, Climate Change and Infrastructure will be advised by an independent advisory team. The advisory team will be responsible for appraising potential investments. The Fund will focus on greenfield investments within target sectors. Investments by the Fund will be equity participations in companies which directly or indirectly own or operate infrastructure in the following target sectors:
	1. Transport-TEN-T (trans-European transport networks as defined in Decision No. 1692/96/EC of the European Parliament).
	2. Energy-TEN-T (trans-European energy networks as defined in Decision No. 1364/2006/EC of the European Parliament) including electricity and gas, transportation, interconnection, storage, infrastructure (including oil and gas storage, regas terminals, pipelines and related facilities and high voltage transmission) and electricity/gas distribution, electricity/gas/oil production, oil storage, as well as carbon capture and storage.
	3. Mature renewables energies-including sustainable energy production, clean transport infrastructure, energy distribution and systems for hybrid transport (e.g. wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, biogas, hydro, waste to energy projects.
	The advisory team will commence in the first quarter of 2010. The Investment Period is expected to be a four year period from 4 March 2010.

Middlesex University: Research

Joan Ryan: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills 
	(1)  how much research funding has been allocated to Middlesex University in each year since 1997;
	(2)  what his Department's latest assessment of the quality of research undertaken at Middlesex university is; and if he will make a statement.

David Lammy: Middlesex university has received the following quality related funding for research allocated by the Higher Education Funding Council for England:
	
		
			  Time series of HEFCE research funding for Middlesex  u niversity for academic years 1997-98 to 2009-10, prepared by HEFCE Analytical Services Group on 18 December 2009, figures are in cash terms, and include late grant adjustments 
			   Middlesex university (£ million) 
			 1997-98 1.93 
			 1998-99 2.16 
			 1999-2000 2.29 
			 2000-01 2.31 
			 2001-02 2.35 
			 2002-03 1.76 
			 2003-04 1.66 
			 2004-05 1.63 
			 2005-06 1.92 
			 2006-07 1.86 
			 2007-08 1.96 
			 2008-09 1.95 
			 2009-10 3.4 
		
	
	Higher Education Statistics Agency data shows that Middlesex university received the following income from Research Councils (2008-09 data are not yet available):
	
		
			   Research council grants (£000) 
			 1997-98 512 
			 1998-99 417 
			 1999-2000 557 
			 2000-01 581 
			 2001-02 335 
			 2002-03 17 
			 2003-04 98 
			 2004-05 263 
			 2005-06 339 
			 2006-07 614 
			 2007-08 1,247 
		
	
	Middlesex university achieved the following results in the Research Assessment Exercise 2008, conducted by the Higher Education Funding Council for England, which was published on 18 December 2008. The Department itself does not directly assess the quality of research undertaken at universities.
	
		
			Overall quality profile (percentage of research activity at each quality level) 
			  Unit of assessment  FTE category A staff submitted  4*  3*  2*  1*  Unclassified 
			 11 Nursing and Midwifery 7.90 5 30 40 20 5 
			 12 Allied Health Professions and Studies 10.10 5 25 35 30 5 
			 23 Computer Science and Informatics 22.30 10 25 45 20 0 
			 32 Geography and Environmental Studies 12.15 5 35 40 20 0 
			 36 Business and Management Studies 38.79 5 25 50 20 0 
			 38 Law 7.30 0 15 35 50 0 
			 40 Social Work and Social Policy and Administration 15.20 5 45 40 10 0 
			 44 Psychology 14.50 0 10 30 60 0 
			 57 English Language and Literature 8.50 5 30 50 15 0 
			 60 Philosophy 7.00 20 45 30 5 0 
			 63 Art and Design 19.00 5 20 55 15 5 
			 64 History of Art, Architecture and Design 12.00 15 40 35 10 0 
			 65 Drama, Dance and Performing Arts 12.10 20 35 25 20 0 
			 66 Communication, Cultural and Media Studies 4.00 0 45 25 30 0 
		
	
	
		
			  RAE2008 quality levels 
			  Scale  Definition 
			 4* Quality that is world-leading in terms of originality, significance and rigour. 
			 3* Quality that is internationally excellent in terms of originality, significance and rigour but which nonetheless falls short of the highest standards of excellence. 
			 2* Quality that is recognised internationally in terms of originality, significance and rigour. 
			 1* Quality that is recognised nationally in terms of originality, significance and rigour. 
			 Unclassified Quality that falls below the standard of nationally recognised work. Or work which does not meet the published definition of research for the purposes of this assessment.

Minimum Wage: Nottingham

Graham Allen: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what estimate he has made of the number of people in Nottingham North constituency who have been paid the uprated minimum wage in the last 10 years.

Patrick McFadden: Data for earnings is not available at the constituency level because of small sample sizes at constituency level in the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE).
	At the Government Office Region level, the lowest available, DTI previously estimated that the number of jobs that stood to benefit from the April 1999 introduction of the National Minimum Wage (NMW) in the East Midlands region was 130,000. In 2009 the BIS estimate for the number of jobs affected by the uprating of the NMW in the East Midlands region was 83,000.

Renewable Energy: Government Assistance

Gregory Barker: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills whether his Department has contributed to the development of the Government's proposed feed-in tariffs scheme.

Patrick McFadden: The Department of Business, Innovation and Skills has contributed to the development of the Government's proposed feed-in-tariffs scheme as part of the normal policy-making process. Officials of the Department have had bilateral meetings with officials of the Department of Energy and Climate Change, are members the Renewable Financial Incentives Programme Board and have agreed the consultation proposals.

Research: Finance

Louise Ellman: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what recent discussions he has had with the  (a) Higher Education Funding Council for England and  (b) Research Councils UK on the effect on fundamental scientific research of the proposed impact plans; and if he will make a statement.

David Lammy: holding answer 6 January 2010
	My colleagues, officials and I discuss a range of issues with HEFCE and the Research Councils regularly.
	Both HEFCE and the Research Councils recognise the breadth of ways in which impact is delivered and the long time horizons often required. Both understand impact broadly to include, for example, benefits to the economy, society, public policy, and quality of life.
	The UK has a world class research base of which we can be rightly proud: second only to the US across a broad range of disciplines and the most productive research base in the G8. Government funding for the research base has doubled in real terms since 1997 and it is right that we recognise the impact of excellent research and remove barriers to harvesting the benefits it delivers to the nation.
	The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and the Research Councils undertake complimentary work to pursue that objective. HEFCE recently consulted on proposals for the Research Excellence Framework (REF), and Research Councils have recently introduced impact statements to grant application forms.
	The REF will recognise and reward university departments with a track record of delivering impacts from excellent research in the past. Research Council impact statements encourage researchers to consider the potential future impact of their work when applying for grants.
	Greater emphasis on impact poses no threat to fundamental research. The primary criterion of both peer review and retrospective research assessment remains research excellence.

Students: Milton Keynes

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills how many students resident in the Milton Keynes area  (a) attended university courses and  (b) received student loans to attend university courses in each year since 1997.

David Lammy: The latest available information from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) on enrolments from Milton Keynes local authority is shown in table 1. Figures for the 2008/09 academic year will be available in January 2010.
	
		
			  Table 1: Enrolments( 1)  from Milton Keynes local authority, UK higher education institutions( 2) , academic year 1997/98 to 2007/08 
			  Academic year  Enrolments 
			 1997/98 3,745 
			 1998/99 3,935 
			 1999/2000 4,005 
			 2000/01 4,020 
			 2001/02 4,250 
			 2002/03 4,400 
			 2003/04 4,650 
			 2004/05 4,880 
			 2005/06 5,055 
			 2006/07 5,185 
			 2007/08 5,250 
			 (1) Covers enrolments to both full-time and part-time undergraduate and postgraduate courses. (2) Excludes the Open university due to inconsistencies in their data across the time series.  Note: Figures are based on a snapshot count as at 1 December to maintain consistency across the time series and have been rounded to the nearest five.  Source: Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). 
		
	
	Data from the Student Loans Company on the number of student loan borrowers from Milton Keynes is shown in table 2.
	
		
			  Table 2: Income contingent student loan borrowers, 2001/02 to 2008/09( 1) 
			  Academic year  Students receiving loans 
			 2001/02 2,500 
			 2002/03 2,700 
			 2003/04 3,000 
			 2004/05 3,100 
			 2005/06 3,300 
			 2006/07 3,400 
			 2007/08 3,600 
			 2008/09 3,800 
			 (1) Consistent data are not available before 2001/02. Figures cover income contingent loans for maintenance and tuition fees, older mortgage style loans are excluded.  Source: Student Loans Company. 
		
	
	Data from the two sources (HESA and SLC) are not directly comparable because certain students and courses (for example postgraduate courses) included in table 1 do not attract student support. Additionally, table 2 provides those who have taken out loans, but does not include those who may have received student support in the form of a grant such as students from lower income families or those who study part-time courses.

Unemployment

Michael Gove: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what methodology his Department used to determine the number of people not in education, employment or training expected to start courses in January as part of the January Guarantee.

Iain Wright: I have been asked to reply.
	We are determined to ensure that every 16 and 17 year-old who is not in education, employment or training (NEET) is given an opportunity to engage in learning so that they can develop the skills they will need for the upturn. The January Guarantee will ensure that all 16 and 17 year-olds who are NEET in January 2010 have the offer of an entry to employment place.
	Information provided by Connexions services shows that there were around 60,000 16 and 17 year-olds NEET in January 2009. Many of these young people will already have a job or a place in learning to start in January, while there are others whose personal circumstances will prevent a return to learning at this time.

British Educational Communications and Technology Agency: Expenditure

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much BECTA has cost in each year since 2007; and if he will make a statement.

Diana Johnson: The funding allocation from the Department for Children, Schools and Families to British Educational Communication Technology Agency (BECTA) for 2007-08 was £38,394,000 and for 2008-09 was £61,550,000.
	The funding allocations are from DCSF and other government grants for expenditure to support the effective use of technology across the education and skills sectors.

Children: Social Services

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what recent estimate he has made of the cost of conducting a serious case review.

Dawn Primarolo: The costs of conducting a Serious Case Review are not held centrally. It is the responsibility of each Local Safeguarding Children Board to undertake a Serious Case Review where appropriate. The costs will vary considerably depending on the complexity of the case and the cost of the independent overview author.

Departmental Conferences

John Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families which conferences held overseas have been attended by civil servants based in his Department in the last three years; and what the cost to the public purse was of such attendance at each conference.

Diana Johnson: To provide a response would be at disproportionate cost.

Departmental Meetings

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families which  (a) individuals other than ministerial colleagues and officials of his Department and  (b) organisations he met in an official capacity in the week commencing 9 November 2009.

Diana Johnson: In its response to a Report by the Public Administration Select Committee "Lobbying: Access and influence in Whitehall", the Government agreed to publish on-line, on a quarterly basis, information about ministerial meetings with outside interest groups. Information for the period 1 October 2009 to 31 December 2009 will be published by Departments as soon as the information is ready.

Departmental Training

John Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many overseas training courses were attended by his Department's civil servants in the latest period for which figures are available; how many civil servants attended each course; and what the total cost to the public purse was of each course.

Diana Johnson: We hold records on training provided centrally. In the 12 months to the end of November 2009, one employee attended a training course where an element of it was delivered overseas. This was a leadership development programme at the National School of Government which consisted of six modules of which five were delivered locally in the UK. The total cost was £14,500, with the overseas element of the programme amounting to £4,350.
	A number of training courses are agreed locally and a detailed check of those records to see if any involved an element of overseas travel would result in disproportionate cost.

Driving

Stephen Ladyman: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what mechanisms are in place to ensure that staff who drive  (a) a vehicle for which his Department is responsible have valid driving licences and  (b) their own vehicles in the course of their official duties have valid driving licences and insurance; what guidance is issued to those staff in respect of road safety while carrying out official duties; what steps are taken to monitor compliance with that guidance; what requirements there are on such staff to report to their line managers accidents in which they are involved while driving in the course of their official duties; and whether such reports are investigated.

Diana Johnson: The Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) has travel policy in place for staff which is accessible via the Department's intranet. This guidance states clear roles and responsibilities for managers and staff. The responses to the questions raised are:
	ix(a) Mechanisms are in place to ensure that staff hold valid driving licences for any vehicles the Department is responsible for. (The Department does not own any vehicles.)
	(b) Mechanisms are in place to ensure that staff who use their own vehicles for official business must have valid driving licences and insurance. Before using their own vehicles for official travel, staff must complete an application form which, together with copies of their Motor Vehicle Insurance Certificate, MOT certificate (if appropriate) and a business case signed by at least a Deputy Director, is sent to the Professional Services and Commodities Category Unit for approval.
	(c) Road safety guidance for staff. The Department has produced a "Safe Driving Policy" booklet (available via the intranet) which provides road safety guidance. It is expected that compliance to the departmental guidelines are observed by staff.
	(d) Steps to monitor compliance to the guidance. Staff have the responsibility to ensure compliance with the guidance.
	(e) Requirements to report accidents. All accidents associated with hire companies are brought to the attention of the Professional Services and Commodities Category Unit for investigation.
	(f) Accident reports are investigated. All notified motor vehicle accidents are thoroughly investigated.

Education Maintenance Allowance

John Battle: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what plans his Department has to extend the education maintenance allowance to age groups other than those currently eligible; and if he will make a statement.

Iain Wright: The policy intention of education maintenance allowance is to encourage more young people aged 16 to 19 from low-income families to participate in post compulsory learning. We do not have plans to extend the eligible age group.
	Adult learners (aged 19 plus) can apply for the adult learning grant (ALG). This pays up to £30 per week, during term time, to those on low incomes undertaking full-time learning for their first full level 2 or first full level 3 qualification. Young people in receipt of EMA can move on to ALG when they become 19 where they remain in learning.

Engagement Programme Funding

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what proportion of 14 to 19 engagement programme funding is allocated to  (a) schools,  (b) colleges and  (c) other organisations in 2009/10; and if he will make a statement.

Iain Wright: The Key Stage 4 Engagement programme is a locally shaped and managed initiative and local authorities have developed a range of models for delivering the programme in their area. DCSF funding for 2009/10 totals £19,334,000 and this is used in different ways by the 142 local authorities involved. Detailed data breaking down how each local authority is deploying this resource is not kept centrally and therefore it is not possible to provide the overview sought by the hon. Member.

Independent Safeguarding Authority

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what communication there has been between the National Safeguarding Delivery Unit and the Independent Safeguarding Authority since July 2009.

Dawn Primarolo: The National Safeguarding Delivery Unit (NSDU) does not routinely communicate with the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA). The ISA has been asked to join the Partnership Network, a broad coalition of partners, including key voluntary sector and professional stakeholders, which has been established to work with the NSDU to pursue specific issues impacting on effective front-line safeguarding practice.
	Sir Roger Singleton provides advice and challenge to the NSDU in his independent capacity as chief adviser on The Safety of Children.

Personal Social and Health Education

Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether education about homosexual relationships is a compulsory part of the school curriculum for  (a) primary school and  (b) secondary school pupils.

Diana Johnson: Under existing legislation, secondary schools are required by law to provide sex education, but there is no requirement for primary schools to provide sex education. Both primary and secondary schools are also required to deliver the statutory science curriculum, which includes age -appropriate information on human biology. In addition we expect schools to provide a much broader programme of sex and relationships education (SRE) through well planned and non statutory personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) education. As part of this programme schools should teach about all types of relationships that exist within society, including homosexual relationships.
	SRE should be taught gradually, so that learning can be built upon year-by-year in a way that is appropriate to the age and maturity of each child. For example, SRE in primary schools will address issues of differences and bullying.
	We have announced our intention to legislate to make PSHE education, including SRE, a statutory subject within the national curriculum at key stages 1-4.
	Provisions are included within the Children, Schools and Families Bill which will give effect to this change. Further information is available in the written ministerial statement by the Secretary of State on 5 November 2009,  Official Report, columns 49-52WS.

Pupils: Epilepsy

Lynda Waltho: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families 
	(1)  if he will produce an action plan to improve the results achieved at school by children with epilepsy;
	(2)  what recent discussions he has had with epilepsy representative groups to improve educational outcomes for children with epilepsy.

Diana Johnson: The Government are committed to closing the gap in educational achievement between children with special educational needs and their peers.
	The Department for Children Schools and Families and the Department of Health are currently engaged with key stakeholders, including those from organisations representing epilepsy, in developing revised guidance to schools on how to support children and young people with medical needs. The guidance will both support schools to develop policies in relation to managing the health needs of children and young people: this will include advice to teachers and support staff on how to administer medicines. We have a stakeholder meeting scheduled for January at which we will discuss how the organisations representing the conditions can enhance the guidance.
	In the Children's Plan progress report, we announced £31 million for the two-year Achievement for All project to improve outcomes for all children and young people with special educational needs and disability which would include children with epilepsy who have additional needs. The project is taking place in around 450 schools across 10 local authorities for two years from September 2009 until September 2011.

Pupils: Religious Freedom

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether his Department has made an assessment of the implications for his Department's policies of the European Court of Human Rights ruling in the case of Lautsi  v Italy on educational institutions in England.

Diana Johnson: We are currently considering the implications of this ruling but our early conclusions are that we believe that the circumstances in Italy are clearly different to those in England and that such a ruling would have no impact on our schools provision. This is because the concerns of the court in this case, which lead to the breach of human rights conclusion, were around the lack of pluralism in the Italian education system-that there was no choice for non-Christian parents/pupils in Italy since every classroom in every school must be adorned with a crucifix-as set out in a Royal Decree. This is certainly not the case in England where there is no such universal display of religious imagery. Parental choice is a key feature of our education system and the majority of schools are maintained schools of no particular religion but there is also the choice available of faith schools catering for many different faiths.

School Meals

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what estimate he has made of the average cost of providing a school meal in the latest period for which figures are available.

Diana Johnson: The Department does not collect this information. However, the Fourth Annual Survey of Take up of School Lunches in England, published in November 2009 by the School Food Trust and the Local Authority Caterers Association, gives average lunch prices in 2008/09 of £1.77 in primary schools, and £1.88 in secondary schools. Information on the average cost of providing a school meal is not collected by the survey.

Commonwealth: Health Services

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development pursuant to the written ministerial statement of 30 November 2009,  Official Report, columns 113-14WS, on the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting; if he will publish the Commonwealth Health Compact agreement; whether under the agreement Commonwealth citizens who are visitors and lawfully in the UK will be entitled to free hospital care and treatment if admission to hospital was non-elective and the need for admission and treatment was unforeseen before the individuals entry into the UK; and if he will make a statement.

Michael Foster: The commitments made in Commonwealth Health Compact agreed at the Commonwealth Heads of Governments meeting in Trinidad and Tobago in November 2009 are set out in the paragraph 93 of the official communiqué of the meeting. In the Compact Heads of Government:
	Called on donor countries to deliver existing commitments for financing in health and identify ways to increase international resources;
	Welcomed the steps taken by low-income countries towards universal access to health services, making them free at the point of use and urged further concerted action;
	Support the role of civil society to advocate for, support and contribute to universal coverage of basic health care.
	The compact focuses on efforts to support developing countries to meet the domestic health needs of their own populations, particularly by strengthening health systems and removing financial barriers to the poor in accessing to domestic health services. The compact is not relevant to and makes no commitments on the provision of health services by any country to visiting foreign nationals.

AIDS: North West

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many  (a) males and  (b) females were diagnosed with AIDS in (i) Chorley, (ii) Lancashire and (ii) the North West in each of the last five years.

Gillian Merron: There were no reported new HIV diagnoses or first AIDS diagnoses in the local authority area of Chorley between 2004 and 2008.
	The information requested relating to Lancashire and the North West is shown in the following table.
	
		
			  Area of diagnosis  Report type  Sex  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008 
			 North West New HIV diagnoses Males 426 460 445 385 407 
			   Females 220 249 194 196 206 
			  First AIDS diagnoses Males 71 68 60 75 49 
			   Females 35 17 23 27 12 
			 
			 Lancashire(1) New HIV diagnoses Males 67 83 56 44 56 
			   Females 20 16 10 19 21 
			  First AIDS diagnoses Males 13 9 13 17 14 
			   Females <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 
			 (1) Does not include sites situated in either Greater Manchester or Merseyside.  Notes: 1. Diagnoses are from reports received to end June 2009. Numbers will rise as further reports are received. 2. Data include individuals who have an existing infection as well as those who have a newly acquired infection and therefore the data do not present incidence of infection. 3. The area in which an individual is diagnosed is not necessarily the area of residence. 4. AIDS diagnoses relate to a persons first diagnosis of an AIDS defining illness. Subsequent diagnoses are not recorded.  Source:  Health Protection Agency.

Central Lancashire Primary Care Trust: Waiting Lists

Mark Hendrick: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average waiting time for  (a) an in-patient and  (b) an out-patient in the Central Lancashire Primary Care Trust was in (i) 1997 and (ii) the latest period for which figures are available.

Mike O'Brien: The information is not available in the format requested. The following table shows the median in-patient waiting time for elective admission patients still waiting in all specialties for the time period 1997-2009 for commissioner organisations in the central Lancashire area.
	
		
			  Organisation  Waiting time (weeks) 
			  Month ending March 1997  
			 North West Lancashire Health Authority (HA) 11.9 
			 South Lancashire HA 15.4 
			   
			  Month Ending October 2009  
			 Central Lancashire Primary Care Trust (PCT) 2.8 
			  Notes: 1. Figures are shown for organisations that existed at the time 2. In-patient waiting times are measured from decision to admit by the consultant to admission to hospital. 3. The figures show the median waiting times for patients still waiting for admission at the end of the period stated. 4. Median waiting times are calculated from aggregate data, rather than patient level data, and therefore are only estimates of the position on average waits. 5. In particular, specialties with low numbers waiting are prone to fluctuations in the median. This should be taken into account when interpreting the data.  Source: Department of Health waiting list collections QF01 and MMRCOM 
		
	
	The following table shows the median out-patient waiting time for a first out-patient appointment for patients seen in the year in all specialties for the time period 1997-2007 for commissioner organisations in the central Lancashire area.
	
		
			  Organisation  Waiting time (weeks) 
			  Financial year 1997-98  
			 South Lancashire HA 7.5 
			 North West Lancashire HA 6.0 
			   
			  Financial year 2007-08  
			 Central Lancashire PCT 4.5 
		
	
	The following table shows the median out-patient waiting time for a first out-patient appointment for patients still waiting at the period end in all specialties for the time period 2005-09 for commissioner organisations in the central Lancashire area.
	
		
			  Organisation  Waiting time (weeks) 
			  Month ending March 2005  
			 Chorley and South Ribble PCT 4.7 
			 West Lancashire PCT 5.3 
			 Preston PCT 4.6 
			   
			  Month ending October 2009  
			 Central Lancashire PCT 2.6 
			  Notes: 1. Figures are shown for organisations that existed at the time. 2. Out-patient waiting times are measured from referral by the GP to first out-patient appointment to the consultant. 3. From 1997-98 all time bands for out-patients seen were first collected so only average waiting first out-patient times can be made from this point in time. 4. The out-patient seen figures relate to the average wait for patients seen during the whole of each year except for 2007-08 where figures relate to quarters 1 and 2 combined. 5. The last time this data were collected for each specialty was for period ending September 2007. 6. From 2004-05 all time bands for out-patients not seen were first collected so only average waiting first out-patient times on a waiting basis can be made from this point in time. 7. Median waiting times are calculated from aggregate data, rather than patient level data, and therefore are only estimates of the position on average waits. 8. In particular, specialties with low numbers waiting are prone to fluctuations in the median. This should be taken into account when interpreting the data. 9. Historically, since 1997, we collected out-patient waiting times based on numbers seen during the quarter (the QM08 return). In addition, we collected data on a 'still waiting' basis in our monthly return alongside our in-patient waiting times figures. However, unlike the in-patient figures, we did not collect the full waiting list on out-patients, just the long waiters. Therefore, it was not possible to calculate the average wait on this basis. 10. Since 2004-05, we collected the full out-patient waiting list, hence we could start calculating average waits on the same basis as in-patients from this date. We have since phased out the out-patient 'seen' collection, so we now can only use the 'still waiting' or 'not seen' figures. 11. The result of this is that average waits appear lower on the 'still waiting' basis simply because this is collected as a snapshot of patients waiting time at the end of the month before they have been seen. Therefore, the averages appear lower, but we have provided both sets so that users can see the effect and trend.  Source: Department of Health waiting list collections QM08R and MMRCOM

Continuing Care: Expenditure

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the cost of continuing healthcare has been in each primary care trust in each of the last three years.

Mike O'Brien: Information on the cost of providing NHS funded continuing healthcare in each primary care trust is not collected centrally.

Dental Services: Aluminium

Paul Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what assessment has been made of the extent of use of yellow-coloured copper aluminium alloy in place of dental gold in dental treatments;
	(2)  how many patients are estimated to have had yellow-coloured copper aluminium alloy fitted instead of dental gold in dental treatment without being informed of the material being used; and if he will make a statement.

Ann Keen: Information is not held centrally on which we could base these assessments. The use of this alloy is not permitted in the manufacture of dental appliances prescribed for national health service patients under schedule 3 (a) of The NHS (Dental Charges) Regulations 2005. From April 2008 dentists have been required to provide information on the range of dental appliances they prescribe for NHS patients. If this suggests that there are abuses of the regulations, we will consult the NHS Counter Fraud Service on how to improve compliance.

Diabetes

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what the cost of treating diabetes in children under the age of 16 years was in each of the last five years;
	(2)  what the cost of treating diabetes in adults was in each of the last five years.

Ann Keen: Estimates of national health service expenditure on diabetes are available from the programme budgeting returns. However, the programme budget returns do not contain age specific data relating to the treatment of diabetes.
	The following table shows the estimated gross level expenditure for diabetes from 2004-08 in England. These figures include primary care trust, Department of Health (DH), strategic health authority and special health authority expenditure. It should be noted that these figures do not include prevention expenditure or general medical services/primary medical services expenditure. This is considerable, but we cannot quantify it separately.
	
		
			   Diabetes expenditure (£)  DH gross expenditure (£)  Diabetes as a proportion of gross expenditure (Percentage) 
			 2004-05 687,402 71,922,179 1.0 
			 2005-06 866,000 80,185,241 1.1 
			 2006-07 1,043,021 84,193,209 1.2 
			 2007-08 1,151,183 93,183,426 1.2

Diabetes: Young People

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how many 16 to 24 year olds are being treated for diabetes in  (a) England,  (b) Leicester and  (c) the East Midlands;
	(2)  how many 16 to 24 year olds in  (a) England,  (b) Leicester and  (c) the East Midlands have been diagnosed with (i) type 1 diabetes and (ii) type 2 diabetes.

Ann Keen: The data requested are not collected routinely, as participation in the National Diabetes Audit (NDA) is not mandatory. The NDA does not have 100 per cent. coverage or participation and therefore cannot provide the information required.
	Data from "Growing Up with Diabetes: children and young people with diabetes in England" reported that in February 2009 there were 4,917 people aged 16 and 17 in England with diabetes and 331 people aged 16 and 17 in the East Midlands Strategic Health Authority (SHA) with diabetes.
	Of the 4,917 people aged 16 and 17 in England with diabetes, 4,629 had type 1 diabetes and 288 had type 2 diabetes. In the East Midlands SHA there were 313 people aged 16 and 17 with type 1 diabetes and 18 people aged 16 and 17 with type 2 diabetes.
	This survey did not collect data on people aged 18 and over and data are only available by SHA.

Health Services: Gloucestershire

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much  (a) Gloucestershire County Council and  (b) district councils in Gloucestershire were paid by the NHS for joint-funded projects in each year since 1999.

Mike O'Brien: The information requested is not collected centrally.

Health Services: Reciprocal Arrangements

Michael Penning: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how much the NHS  (a) was entitled to reclaim and  (b) has reclaimed for healthcare carried out on UK citizens in other countries with which the UK has a reciprocal agreement in the last 12 month period for which figures are available;
	(2)  how much has been reclaimed by the NHS for healthcare carried out in England in respect of nationals of other countries with which the UK has a reciprocal agreement in the last 12 month period for which figures are available.

Gillian Merron: The United Kingdom does not claim reimbursement for UK citizens treated in other countries on the basis of bilateral health care agreements, as the costs are incurred in the country that provided the health care, and not in the UK.
	Similarly, countries with which the UK has a bilateral health care agreement do not claim reimbursement from the UK for treatment provided in the UK to their citizens, as the costs are incurred in the UK, and not in the citizen's home country.
	European regulations provide for the UK to reclaim costs from the European economic area and Switzerland for health care provided to their citizens, and vice versa.

Multiple Sclerosis: Nurses

Mark Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many nurses specialise in caring for people with multiple sclerosis.

Ann Keen: This nurse speciality is not identified separately on the NHS workforce census.

NHS: Internet

Tom Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many websites have the suffix nhs.uk in their web address.

Mike O'Brien: As at 15 December 2009, there were 6,004 live United Kingdom websites with the nhs.uk suffix. 3,985 of these were live records within the English national health service web estate. The remainder have been allocated by the devolved administrations.
	These numbers are constantly changing as new websites are created and old websites decommissioned.

Nottingham Hospital: Manpower

Graham Allen: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many  (a) doctors and  (b) nurses were employed at Nottingham City Hospital in (i) 1997 and (ii) 2009.

Ann Keen: The information is not available in the format requested. However, data for the Nottingham University Hospitals National Health Service Trust is set out in the following table.
	
		
			  NHS hospital and community health services: qualified nursing staff and medical and dental staff within specified organisations 1997 to 2008 
			  Headcount 
			   As at 30 September each year 
			   1997  2008 
			 Qualified Nursing staff 3,099 3,770 
			 Nottingham City Hospital NHS Trust 1,442 n/a 
			 Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham University NHS Trust 1,657 n/a 
			 Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust - 3,770 
			 Medical and Dental staff 967 1,371 
			 Nottingham City Hospital NHS Trust 371 n/a 
			 Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham University NHS Trust 596 n/a 
			 Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust - 1,371 
			 n/a = Not applicable.  Note: In 2006 Nottingham City Hospital NHS Trust merged with Queens Medical Centre Nottingham University NHS Trust to become Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust. Therefore data has been provided for Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust in 2008 and its component parts in 1997.  Data Quality Workforce statistics are compiled from data sent by more than 300 NHS trusts and primary care trusts in England. The Information Centre for health and social care liaises closely with these organisations to encourage submission of complete and valid data and seeks to minimise inaccuracies and the effect of missing and invalid data. Processing methods and procedures are continually being updated to improve data quality. Where this happens any impact on figures already published will be assessed but unless this is significant at national level they will not be changed. Where there is impact only at detailed or local level this will be footnoted in relevant analyses.  Source: Medical and Dental Workforce Census, The Information Centre for health and social care

Social Services: Reform

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  whether the implementation of his plans for the NHS in respect of social care provision will require legislation;
	(2)  whether social care provision commissioned by primary care trusts will be exempt from means-testing;
	(3)  what powers he plans to provide for NHS commissioners to commission social care;
	(4)  what uplift he expects each primary care trust to receive consequent on the takeover of social care provision by primary care trusts;
	(5)  what plans he has to transfer  (a) control over provision and  (b) responsibility for funding of social care to primary care trusts;
	(6)  what plans he has for the future role of the NHS in respect of control over provision of social care; and if he will make a statement.

Phil Hope: Both "NHS 2010-15; good to great", a copy of which has already been placed in the Library, and "The NHS operating framework for England for 2010/11" emphasised the importance of the NHS working together with its partners to deliver joined up services around people's needs and support people to stay healthy and independent. Neither document suggested structural changes to accountability or governance.
	A copy of the framework has been placed in the Library.

Surgery: Nottingham

Graham Allen: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many surgical operations were carried out on the NHS in Nottingham North constituency in  (a) 1997 and  (b) 2008.

Mike O'Brien: This information is not available in the format requested. Data on finished consultant episodes(1) (FCEs) is collected by primary care trust (PCT) of responsibility(2), the commissioning PCT, not by constituency.
	The number of FCEs where there was a main procedure(3) with Nottingham City as the PCT of responsibility in 2008-08 and 1997-98 is shown in the following table. This includes activity in national health service hospitals in England and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector.
	(1) An FCE is a continuous period of admitted patient care under one consultant within one health care provider. FCEs are counted against the year in which they end. Figures do not represent the number of different patients, as a person may have more than one episode of care within the same stay in hospital or in different stays in the same year.
	(2) PCT of responsibility-this is a derived field providing the PCT responsible for the patient. The commissioning responsibility for individual patients rests with the PCT with whom the patient is registered. Therefore, this is based on the postcode of the patient's general practitioner (GP). This means that patients with a GP in one PCT area may reside in a neighbouring or other area but remain the responsibility of the PCT with whom their GP of registration is associated. PCTs are also responsible for non-registered patients who are resident within their boundaries.
	(3) Main procedure-the first recorded procedure or intervention in each episode (Operating Procedure Code Supplement codes AOO to X97), usually the most resource intensive procedure or intervention performed during the episode. It is appropriate to use main procedure when looking at admission details, (e.g. time waited), but a more complete count of episodes with a particular procedure is obtained by looking at the main and the secondary procedures.
	
		
			   Finished consultant episodes 
			 2008-09 46,357 
			 1997-98 39,152 
			  Source: Hospital Episode Statistics, The Information Centre for health and social care

Surgery: Obesity

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many surgical procedures to treat obesity were carried out on the NHS in  (a) England,  (b) each region and  (c) each strategic health authority area in each year since 1997.

Gillian Merron: Data on finished consultant episodes with a primary diagnosis of obesity as well as a main or secondary procedure of bariatric surgery for England and each health authority or regional area are provided in the following table. Data are available for each year from 1997-98 to 2008-09.
	The NHS Information Centre has provided slightly revised data to that previously provided for the years 1997-98 to 2006-07 following a revision of the definition of bariatric surgery.
	
		
			  Count of Finished Consultant Episodes( 1)  with a primary diagnosis( 2)  of obesity( 4 ) and a main or secondary procedure( 3)  of bariatric surgery( 4 ) broken down by SHA of residence( 5)  for 1997-98 to 2008-09 - Activity in English national health service hospitals and English NHS commissioned activity in the independent sector 
			  Strategic health authority (SHA)   2008-09  2007-08  2006-07  2005-06  2004-05  2003-04  2002-03  2001-02  2000-01  1999- 20 00  1998-99  1997-98 
			 England total  4,221 2,695 1,934 1,032 736 469 340 280 257 196 196 148 
			 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire SHA Q01 - - - 40 25 12 9 6 7 2 4 6 
			 Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire SHA Q02 - - - 28 18 9 6 8 7 2 3 2 
			 Essex SHA Q03 - - - 12 13 7 5 3 5 4 1 1 
			 North West London SHA Q04 - - - 69 46 11 13 5 7 3 1 1 
			 North Central London SHA Q05 - - - 29 16 12 5 2 3 5 - 2 
			 North East London SHA Q06 - - - 24 10 4 3 1 2 1 2 - 
			 South East London SHA Q07 - - - 32 27 18 11 13 18 11 4 3 
			 South West London SHA Q08 - - - 33 22 11 11 5 8 7 2 4 
			 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear SHA Q09 - - - 58 33 23 11 9 8 8 10 10 
			 County Durham and Tees Valley SHA Q10 - - - 21 15 7 5 7 6 3 4 2 
			 North and East Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire SHA Q11 - - - 136 63 37 20 19 8 15 12 4 
			 West Yorkshire SHA Q12 - - - 59 51 65 40 38 56 42 31 30 
			 Cumbria and Lancashire SHA Q13 - - - 13 18 17 11 14 9 14 7 7 
			 Greater Manchester SHA Q14 - - - 20 21 15 9 4 9 5 7 6 
			 Cheshire and Merseyside SHA Q15 - - - 8 33 32 41 36 24 7 18 8 
			 Thames Valley SHA Q16 - - - 13 9 6 9 6 7 4 - - 
			 Hampshire and Isle of Wight SHA Q17 - - - 2 4 3 - 1 - 3 4 2 
			 Kent and Medway SHA Q18 - - - 12 18 5 5 9 4 3 3 3 
			 Surrey and Sussex SHA Q19 - - - 33 21 16 13 13 9 7 5 - 
			 Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire SHA Q20 - - - 57 19 12 1 3 - 3 3 4 
			 South West Peninsula SHA Q21 - - - 33 22 13 12 24 7 12 6 5 
			 Dorset and Somerset SHA Q22 - - - 31 13 4 3 1 4 2 2 - 
			 South Yorkshire SHA Q23 - - - 107 88 63 43 24 22 15 17 23 
			 Trent SHA Q24 - - - 85 42 20 22 14 14 6 7 10 
			 Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland SHA Q25 - - - 19 33 11 8 2 4 - 5 3 
			 Shropshire and Staffordshire SHA Q26 - - - 23 21 18 11 3 3 3 11 3 
			 Birmingham and the Black Country SHA Q27 - - - 25 20 12 10 7 3 7 25 7 
			 West Midlands South SHA Q28 - - - 9 15 6 3 2 3 2 2 2 
			 North East SHA Q30 268 217 132 - - - - - - - - - 
			 North West SHA Q31 316 75 77 - - - - - - - - - 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber SHA Q32 584 491 439 - - - - - - - - - 
			 East Midlands SHA Q33 550 279 205 - - - - - - - - - 
			 West Midlands SHA Q34 445 345 244 - - - - - - - - - 
			 East of England SHA Q35 243 117 87 - - - - - - - - - 
			 London SHA Q36 909 582 299 - - - - - - - - - 
			 South East Coast SHA Q37 446 281 139 - - - - - - - - - 
			 South Central SHA Q38 157 127 110 - - - - - - - - - 
			 South West SHA Q39 302 181 202 - - - - - - - - - 
			 England-Not otherwise specified U 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 
			 Other, foreign and unknown SHAs  52 24 12 6 24 29 12 10 9 6 10 7 
			 (1) Finished Consultant Episode (FCE) A FCE is a continuous period of admitted patient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider. FCEs are counted against the year in which they end. Figures do not represent the number of different patients, as a person may have more than one episode of care within the same stay in hospital or in different stays in the same year. (2) Primary diagnosis The primary diagnosis is the first of up to 20 (14 from 2002-03 to 2006-07 and seven prior to 2002-03) diagnosis fields in the HES data set and provides the main reason why the patient was admitted to hospital. (3) Number of episodes with a (named) main or secondary procedure The number of episodes where the procedure (or intervention) was recorded in any of the 24 (12 from 2002-03 to 2006-07 and four prior to 2002-03) procedure fields in a HES record. A record is only included once in each count, even if the procedure is recorded in more than one procedure field of the record. Note that more procedures are carried out than episodes with a main or secondary procedure. For example, patients under going a 'cataract operation' would tend to have at least two procedures-removal of the faulty lens and the fitting of a new one-counted in a single episode. (4) Obesity and Bariatric Surgery Codes Obesity: ICD-10 code used for obesity was E66. Bariatric Surgery Procedure Codes: Recent guidance from the standards and classification team at Connecting for Health has led to a revision of the definition for 'Bariatric Surgery'. Due to these changes revised data has been provided. (See: OPCS-4 explanatory notes for more details on the bariatric surgery procedure codes) The OPCS-4 procedure codes below are used to denote bariatric surgery. The OPCS-4 procedure codes (1996-97 to 2005-06, and 2006-07 to 2008-09) are: G28.1, G28.2, G28.3, G28.8, G28.9, G30.1, G30.2, G30.8, G30.9, G31.1, G31.2, G31.3, G31.4, G31.8, G31.9, G31.0, G32.1, G32.2, G32.3, G32.8, G32.9, G32.0, G33.1, G33.2, G33.3, G33.8, G33.9, G33.0, G38.8, G48.1, G48.2.  The following additional four digit OPCS-4 codes have been added due to the use of OPCS-4.3 in 2006-07 data: G28.4, G28.5, G30.3, G30.4, G31.5, G31.6, G32.4, G32.5, G33.5, G33.6, G38.7, G71.6 Additional OPCS-4.4 codes used for the 2007-08 and 2008-09 data are: G27.1, G27.2, G27.3, G27.4, G27.5, G27.8 and G27.9. (5) SHA/primary care trust (PCT) of residence The SHA or PCT containing the patient's normal home address. This does not necessarily reflect where the patient was treated as they may have travelled to another SHA/PCT for treatment.  PCT/SHA data quality In July 2006, the NHS reorganised SHA and PCT in England from 28 SHAs into 10, and from 303 PCTs into 152. As a result data from 2006-07 onwards is not directly comparable with previous years. Data have been presented for those SHA/PCTs which have valid data for the breakdown presented here. As a result some SHA/PCTs may be missing from the list provided.  Assessing growth through time HES figures are available from 1989-90 onwards. Changes to the figures over time need to be interpreted in the context of improvements in data quality and coverage (particularly in earlier years), improvements in coverage of independent sector activity (particularly from 2006-07) and changes in NHS practice. For example, apparent reductions in activity may be due to a number of procedures which may now be undertaken in outpatient settings and so no longer include in admitted patient HES data.  Strategic Health Authority Configuration In 2006-07 there was a SHA configuration change, where 28 SHAs merged into 10. For this reason, 2006-07 is based on the new configuration.  Bariatric Surgery Procedure Codes: The OPCS-4 procedure codes below are used to denote bariatric surgery. The OPCS-4 procedure codes (1996-97 to 2005-06, and 2006-07 to 2008-09) are: G28.1 Partial gastrectomy and anastomosis of stomach to duodenum G28.2 Partial gastrectomy and anastomosis of stomach to transposed jejunum G28.3 Partial gastrectomy and anastomosis of stomach jejunum nec G28.8 Other specific partial excision of stomach G28.9 Unspecified partial excision of stomach G30.1 Gastroplasty nec G30.2 Partitioning of stomach nec G30.8 Other specified plastic operations on stomach G30.9 Unspecified plastic operations on stomach G31.1 Bypass of stomach by anastomosis of oesophagus to duodenum G31.2 Bypass of stomach by anastomosis of stomach to duodenum G31.3 Revision of anastomosis of stomach to duodenum G31.4 Conversion to anastomosis of stomach to duodenum G31.8 Other specified connection of stomach to duodenum G31.9 Unspecified connection of stomach to duodenum G31.0 Conversion from previous anastomosis of stomach to duodenum G32.1 Bypass of stomach by anastomosis of stomach to transposed jejunum G32.2 Revision of anastomosis of stomach to transposed jejunum G32.3 Conversion to anastomosis of stomach to transposed jejunum G32.8 Other specified connection of stomach to transposed jejunum G32.9 Unspecified connection of stomach to transposed jejunum G32.0 Conversion from previous anastomosis of stomach to transposed jejunum G33.1 Bypass of stomach by anastomosis of stomach to jejunum nec G33.2 Revision of anastomosis of stomach to jejunum nec G33.3 Conversion of anastomosis of stomach to jejunum nec 
			 G33.8 Other specified other connection of stomach to jejunum G33.9 Unspecified other connection of stomach to jejunum G33.0 Conversion from previous anastomosis of stomach to jejunum nec G38.8 Other specified other open operations on stomach G48.1 Insertion of gastric bubble G48.2 Attention to gastric bubble The following additional four digit OPCS-4 codes have been added due to the use of OPCS-4.3 in 2006-07 data: G28.4 Sleeve gastrectomy and duodenal switch G28.5 Sleeve gastrectomy nec G30.3 Partitioning of stomach using band G30.4 Partitioning of stomach using staples G31.5 Closure of connection of stomach and duodenum G31.6 Attention to connection of stomach and duodenum G32.4 Closure of connection of stomach to transposed jejunum G32.5 Attention to connection of stomach to transposed jejunum G33.5 Closure of connection of stomach to jejunum nec G33.6 Attention to connection of stomach to jejunum G38.7 Removal of gastric band G71.6 Duodenal switch Additional OPCS-4.4 codes used for the 2007-08 and 2008-09 data are: G27.1 Total gastrectomy and excision of surrounding tissue G27.2 Total gastrectomy and anastomosis of oesophagus to duodenum G27.3 Total gastrectomy and interposition of jejunum G27.4 Total gastrectomy and anastomosis of oesophagus to transposed jejunum G27.5 Total gastrectomy and anastomosis of oesophagus to jejunum nec G27.8 Other specified total excision of stomach G27.9 Unspecified total excision of stomach  Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The NHS Information Centre for health and social care

Fuel Poverty

John Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how many households were in fuel poverty in  (a) the UK and  (b) Billericay constituency in (i) 2003 and (ii) 2009.

David Kidney: The estimated number of households in fuel poverty in the UK was around two million in 2003. The latest year for which figures are available is for 2007 and this shows that there were around four million fuel poor households in the UK.
	The most recently available sub-regional split of fuel poverty relates to 2006, and shows that there were around 2,600 fuel poor households in the Billericay constituency. In 2003 there were around 2,400 fuel poor households in the Billericay constituency.

Fuel Poverty

Robert Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what steps he plans to take to reduce the level of fuel poverty among households not on the gas main.

David Kidney: We are aware of the challenges that exist for households off the gas main. To help address this:
	Ofgem has incentivised large gas networks to provide connections to deprived households off the network;
	CERT provides incentives for energy suppliers to promote heat pumps in off gas grid vulnerable properties;
	Warm Front in England is piloting air source heat pumps, and
	The forthcoming Renewable Heat Incentive has the potential to benefit off gas grid consumers.

Biofuels

Graham Stringer: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what progress his Department has made in defining its biomass sustainability criteria.

David Kidney: holding answer 6 January 2010
	The Government's approach to defining sustainability criteria for biomass is set out in the UK Renewable Energy Strategy, launched in July.
	We are awaiting the European Commission's report on the requirement for a sustainability scheme for solid and gaseous biomass used for heat and electricity, which was due by 31 December 2009. This report shall be accompanied, where appropriate, with proposals to the European Parliament and Council.
	We will then consider this report and its implications for introducing sustainability criteria for the biomass used for heat and electricity in the UK.

BP: Canvey Island

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what assessment he has made of the effects on the use of the local road network of BP's contract to lease the Oikos terminal on Canvey Island; and if he will make a statement.

Jonathan R Shaw: I have been asked to reply
	:
	The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has made no assessment of the effects on the use of the local road network of BP Oil UK Ltd.'s contract to lease storage facilities at Oikos Storage Ltd.'s site on Canvey Island.
	Oikos will remain the operator of this site for the purposes of the Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999 (COMAH) and will have overall responsibility for safety throughout the duration of the BP contract. HSE's role is to monitor safety at the site. HSE will continue to do this and will assess any significant changes that Oikos make to the site and to the site's COMAH safety report as a result of the implementation of the BP contract. As part of their responsibilities under COMAH, Oikos are expected to identify and assess hazards and risks associated with the transport of hazardous substances that could lead to major accidents at the site.
	HSE understands that hazardous materials will be transferred to and from the Oikos site though underground pipelines throughout the duration of the BP contract. The safety of any hazardous materials transported by road in, for example, road tankers, would be covered by the Carriage of Dangerous Goods and Use of Transportable Pressure Regulations 2009 enforced the Police and the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA).

Climate Change: British Overseas Territories

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will make an assessment of the effects on the British Overseas Territories of decisions reached at the Copenhagen climate change conference.

Joan Ruddock: I refer the hon. Member to the oral statement made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change regarding the Copenhagen Climate Summit outcomes on 5 January 2010,  Official Report, column 42. As the statement suggested, we are continuing to reflect on the implications of the outcome of COP15 for the UK and for the Overseas Territories and are liaising with them directly over that.

Climate Change: International Cooperation

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will place in the Library a copy of each document he presented to the recent United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen; and if he will make a statement.

Joan Ruddock: The UK negotiates as part of the EU and therefore all formal submissions we have made to the UNFCCC have been as part of the EU. The EU made one submission during the Copenhagen climate change conference-the EU presented its fifth national communication under the UNFCCC on 7 December. A copy is available in the Library of the House. I refer the hon. Member to the Secretary of State's statement of 5 January 2010,  Official Report, column 42, on the outcomes of the Copenhagen climate change conference.

Departmental Legislation

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what criminal offences have been  (a) created and  (b) abolished by secondary legislation sponsored by his Department since 1 October 2008.

Joan Ruddock: The offences we have identified include:
	 The Transfrontier shipments of radioactive waste and spent fuel regulations 2008 (SI 2008/3087)
	The Transfrontier shipments of radioactive waste and spent fuel regulations 2008 (SI 2008/3087) continue to implement council directive 96/29/Euratom laying down basic standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionizing radiation, and implement directive 2006/117/Euratom on the supervision and control of shipments of radioactive waste and spent fuel. The regulations create several offences relating to the transfrontier shipment of radioactive waste or spent fuel without an authorisation granted by the Environment Agency (in England and Wales), the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (in Scotland) or the chief inspector appointed under the Radioactive Substances Act 1993 (in Northern Ireland).
	Regulation 4(1) creates an offence of shipping radioactive waste or spent fuel to a destination outside the United Kingdom, or into the United Kingdom from a third country (except by way of transit), except in accordance with an authorisation. Regulation 4(2) creates an offence of shipping radioactive waste or spent fuel into the United Kingdom from another European member state except under the authority of an authorisation granted by that member state.
	Regulation 5(1) creates an offence of shipping radioactive waste or spent fuel into the United Kingdom from a third country by way of transit to another member state except in accordance with an authorisation granted by the member state of destination.
	Regulation 5(2) creates an offence of shipping radioactive waste or spent fuel into the United Kingdom from a third country for transit to another third country except in accordance with an authorisation by the UK authorities, or where relevant by the other member state.
	Regulation 8(2) creates an offence of failing to notify the authorities within 15 days that a consignment of radioactive waste or spent fuel from outside the UK has been received.
	Regulation 9(4) creates an offence of failing to notify the authorities that radioactive waste or spent fuel consigned from the UK to a different country has arrived, within 15 days of that arrival.
	Regulation 10(2) creates an offence of failing to ensure that a shipment of radioactive waste or spent fuel is accompanied by the correct documents.
	Regulation 11(2) creates an offence of making a false or misleading statement in an application under the regulations for authorisation in relation to shipping radioactive waste or spent fuel.
	Regulation 14(3) creates an offence of failure to comply with an instruction of the authorities to return a consignment of radioactive waste or spent fuel to the country of origin, or to otherwise dispose of it.
	Regulation 14(4)(b) creates an offence of failing to comply with a notice requiring the holder of an authorisation to take back any radioactive waste or spent fuel that has been sent out of the United Kingdom.
	Regulation 15(2) creates an offence of failing to comply with a notice sent by the authorities requiring that information is sent or that actions are taken or are not taken in relation to the shipment of radioactive waste or spent fuel.
	The regulations also revoke the "Transfrontier Shipment of Radioactive Waste Regulations 1993 (SI 1993/3031)" which contained in regulation 18 a set of offences which were similar in nature to the above new offences (although they did not apply to spent fuel).
	 Criminal Jurisdiction (Application to Offshore Energy Installation etc) Order 2009
	Although not creating any new criminal offences, this order extends the existing criminal law regime in England and Wales and Scotland for Acts or omissions that take place on and around a renewable energy installation in the UK's renewable energy zone.

Departmental Pay

Lee Scott: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how much has been paid in bonuses to civil servants in his Department in 2009.

Joan Ruddock: An element of the Department of Energy and Climate Change's overall pay award is allocated to non-consolidated variable pay related to performance. These payments are used to drive high performance and form part of the pay award for members of staff who demonstrate exceptional performance, for example by exceeding targets set or meeting challenging objectives.
	Non-consolidated variable pay awards are funded from within existing pay bill controls, and have to be re-earned each year against pre-determined targets and, as such, do not add to future pay bill costs.
	The total amount of non consolidated variable pay paid to civil servants in DECC from January to August 2009 inclusive (the latest figures available) is £484,000.

Renewable Energy

Jacqui Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what steps he plans to take to ensure that local communities benefit directly from local renewable energy generation.

Joan Ruddock: The Government are developing and demonstrating successful models of community engagement through the 'Low Carbon Communities Challenge'; phase 1 winners were announced on 21 December. We are also setting effective financial subsidy levels through Feed-in Tariffs and the Renewable Heat Incentive to benefit communities.

Sellafield: Waste Management

Mark Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what recent representations he has received on policy on disposal of nuclear waste from Sellafield.

David Kidney: The Department has regular contact with the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), its nuclear sites and other interested stakeholders. Government recognises the importance of managing radioactive waste to the highest environmental, security and safety standards and works closely with the NDA to ensure that this is done achieving best value for money consistent with those standards.

Warm Front Scheme: East Sussex

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how many households in  (a) Lewes constituency and  (b) East Sussex County Council area received assistance under the Warm Front programme in 2008-09.

David Kidney: In 2008-09, 322 households in Lewes constituency and 2,921 in East Sussex county council area received assistance from the Warm Front Scheme.

Warm Front Scheme: Stroud

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how much has been spent on the Warm Front programme in Stroud district in each year since its inception; and what other measures the Government has taken in Stroud district to  (a) encourage greater energy efficiency measures and  (b) reduce the level of fuel poverty.

David Kidney: The following table details the amount spent by the Warm Front Scheme each year in Stroud since June 2005.
	
		
			  Warm Front spend 
			   £ 
			 2005-06 180,242 
			 2006-07 325,327 
			 2007-08 347,282 
			 2008-09 471,998 
			 2009-10(1) 617,018 
			 (1) Up to 30 November 2009. 
		
	
	The Government have a strong package of national programmes aimed at encouraging greater energy efficiency measures and reducing the level of fuel poverty. The combination of Warm Front, the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT), Community Energy Savings Programme (CESP), Decent Homes and local programmes delivered through local government, partnerships, energy suppliers, Eaga and National Energy Action (such as Warm Zones and the Community Energy Efficiency Fund) are all important in tackling fuel poverty and encouraging greater energy efficiency across England.
	In December 2009, my Department announced the launch of the Home Energy Pay As You Save (PAYS) pilots. Stroud district council in partnership with Severn Wye Energy Agency will deliver a PAYS pilot project to householders within the Stroud area. The PAYS pilot will give households the opportunity to invest in energy efficiency and microgeneration technologies in their homes with no up-front cost. Householders will make repayments spread over a long enough period so that repayments are lower than their predicted energy bill savings, meaning financial and carbon savings are made from day one.